linux-kernel - Re: hpet_disable() call sites

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: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1203271552460.2542@ionos>
Date:	Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:54:49 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
cc:	mingo@...e.hu, hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: hpet_disable() call sites

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 27.03.12 at 14:58, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> Is there any reason why hpet_disable() should not also be called
> >> from (or some equivalent action be taken, perhaps including clearing
> >> certain bits in the individual counters' configuration registers, which
> >> are apparently - but perhaps wrongly - implied to be clear in e.g.
> >> hpet_set_mode(), in) hpet_enable()?
> > 
> > No, there is no particular reason why we don't clear those registers.
> 
> In that case I'll prepare a patch to do so. One related question is
> whether use of the HPET should be suppressed when any bit unknown
> to the kernel is found set, or whether unknown bits should also be
> cleared.

Hmm. Good question. We might at least add a printk to alert about it.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/