linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 8250_pci: add -ENODEV code for Intel EG20T PCH

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]

Message-ID: <20110530074722.GA7947@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 30 May 2011 15:47:22 +0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya-linux@....okisemi.com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, qi.wang@...el.com,
	yong.y.wang@...el.com, joel.clark@...el.com,
	kok.howg.ewe@...el.com, toshiharu-linux@....okisemi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 8250_pci: add -ENODEV code for Intel EG20T PCH

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 04:42:04PM +0900, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote:
> Intel EG20T PCH has UART device which is compatible with 8250.
> Currently, with general configuration, the PCH UART driver is not loaded but 8250 standard driver is loaded.
> Therefore, in case of using PCH UART driver, need to disable 8250 pci function.
> However, this procedure is not best solution.
> 
> This patch, in 8250_pci, if the device is the PCH or the family IOH,
> '-ENODEV' is returned.
> As a result, disabling 8250-pci processing becomes unnecessary.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya-linux@....okisemi.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/serial/8250_pci.c |   13 +++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_pci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_pci.c
> index 738cec9..2678d9d 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_pci.c
> @@ -2559,6 +2559,19 @@ pciserial_init_one(struct pci_dev *dev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SERIAL_PCH_UART) || defined(CONFIG_SERIAL_PCH_UART_MODULE)
> +	if ((dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8811) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8812) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8813) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8814) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x8027) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x8028) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x8029) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x800C) ||
> +	   (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x800D))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +#endif

Why put this with an #if around it?  Why not just always not bind to
this driver as we have a "correct" driver for the hardware now?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/