| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4D8B14BD.2060602@de.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:54:05 +0100 From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> To: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ibm.com> CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, qemu-devel@...gnu.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stefanha@...il.com, kwolf@...hat.com, prerna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] virtio_blk: add cache control support Am 24.03.2011 04:05, schrieb Anthony Liguori: >> ie. lguest and S/390 don't trap writes to config space. >> >> Or perhaps they should? But we should be explicit about needing it... > I don't think we ever operated on the assumption that config space writes would trap. > > I don't think adding it is the right thing either because you can do byte access to the config space which makes atomicity difficult. There is the additional problem, that s390 has no MMIO and,therefore, there is no real HW support for trapping writes to an area. You can use page faults, or read-only faults on newer systems, but this is expensive. In addition, page faults only deliver the page frame, but not the offset within a page. > > Any reason not to use a control queue to negotiate dynamic features? Sounds reasonable. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists