linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PCI: Disable ASPM if BIOS asks us to

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101202225511.GA13040@srcf.ucam.org>
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2010 22:55:11 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Disable ASPM if BIOS asks us to

On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:51:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, December 02, 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:24:31PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > +	if (!aspm_force) {
> > > >  		aspm_disabled = 1;
> > > > +		if (clear)
> > > > +			aspm_clear_state = clear;
> > > 
> > > Well, is the if(clear) really necessary?
> > 
> > If the FADT disables ASPM, and then we fail to get the control bits, 
> > we'd call this twice and turn off aspm_clear_state.
> 
> Ah, thanks.  So if you used a separate function for handling the "BIOS tells
> us there's no ASPM" case, that wouldn't be necessary? ;-)

Yeah. I'll rework and resend - I've also figured out that we need to 
clear the common PM bit.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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/