linux-kernel - Re: Regression: 2.6.34 boot fails on E5405 system, bisected: de08e2c26

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:25:30 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>
CC:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
	Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
Subject: Re: Regression: 2.6.34 boot fails on E5405 system, bisected: 	de08e2c26

On 07/14/2010 11:19 AM, Pan, Jacob jun wrote:
> 
> I have not seen the patch yet, but there is no guarantee that
> capabilities are always laid out in ascending address. So I think
> we cannot bail out when
> 	pcie_cap >> 20 <= pos
> 
> If that is some bug in the config space, can we fix it with some quirks?
> 

I don't understand where that arithmetic comes from.

Basic config space [0-255] and extended config space [256-4095] are laid
out completely differently, and they have separate capability chains.
In theory one could have extended capabilities in basic config space,
but since the root of that chain is at 0x100, you'd have to have
extended config space available anyway in order to see it.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/