linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2.6.37] irq: irq and pci_ids patch for Intel DH89xxCC DeviceIDs

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20110110202934.5e4924b8@endymion.delvare>
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2011 20:29:34 +0100
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	"Heasley, Seth" <seth.heasley@...el.com>
Cc:	"jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.37] irq: irq and pci_ids patch for Intel DH89xxCC 
 DeviceIDs

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:19:15 -0800, Heasley, Seth wrote:
> >> --- linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig	2011-01-04
> >16:50:19.000000000 -0800
> >> +++ linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c	2011-01-06 14:16:00.000000000
> >-0800
> >> @@ -611,6 +611,15 @@
> >>  		r->set = pirq_piix_set;
> >>  		return 1;
> >>  	}
> >> +
> >> +	if ((device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_LPC_MIN) &&
> >> +		(device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_LPC_MAX)) {
> >> +		r->name = "PIIX/ICH";
> >> +		r->get = pirq_piix_get;
> >> +		r->set = pirq_piix_set;
> >> +		return 1;
> >> +	}
> >> +
> >
> >I'm curious why we have separate sections for INTEL_5_3400_SERIES,
> >INTEL_COUGARPOINT and now INTEL_DH89XXCC? We do the same thing for all
> >3, so it would make sense to merge the tests to avoid duplicating the
> >code.
> 
> Some products are defining a range of DeviceIDs rather than one or two specific IDs, so these blocks are for catching any DeviceID in the range.  I'm certainly open to suggestion for a better way to handle these, and I agree that the current way is awkward.

I understand the need to have separate blocks for separate IDs and for
ID ranges. But all the ranges could be covered by the same block:

	if ((device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5_3400_SERIES_LPC_MIN && 
	     device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5_3400_SERIES_LPC_MAX)
	 || (device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MIN && 
	     device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MAX)) {
		r->name = "PIIX/ICH";
		r->get = pirq_piix_get;
		r->set = pirq_piix_set;
		return 1;
	}

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
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/