linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/8] pci: Add CircuitCo VENDOR ID and MinnowBoard DEVICE ID

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: <CAErSpo6Dss9hj33QRP-Leob05WT-uN-MWUAZBfh+VDtUvCWNkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:46:04 -0600
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	danders@...cuitco.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] pci: Add CircuitCo VENDOR ID and MinnowBoard DEVICE ID

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:30 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 06/26/2013 12:37 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, that's what I was thinking.
>>
>> But Peter's comment makes more sense to me now.  The spec refers to
>> that config register as "Subsystem ID," not "Subsystem Device ID," but
>> I was confused because most existing usage treats it as a device ID.
>> For example, the field in struct pci_device_id is named "subdevice,"
>> and all the existing #defines in pci_ids.h are of the form
>> PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_*.
>>
>> Device IDs are pretty specific identifiers, so I was thinking that a
>> "sub-device ID" would be even more specific.  Then it would make no
>> sense to have a "sub-device ID" that was as generic as "MINNOWBOARD."
>> But the register is actually *not* a "sub-device ID," and I can see
>> that using the same Subsystem ID for all the devices on a board might
>> make sense.
>>
>
> Subsystem IDs is basically a board ID in the traditional PC view, but
> they didn't call it that because it would have been confusing in other,
> nontraditional configurations.
>
> Microsoft has a "best practices" document, which may end up becoming
> basis for a future PCI-SIG document clarifying the standard:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/gg463287.aspx

Interesting, thanks for the link.  If I read that correctly, the
MinnowBoard is basically a motherboard, and any board layout change or
component value change will require a new Subsystem ID, which will in
turn require a pch_gbe update.  That doesn't sound optimal, but maybe
people don't actually interpret it that strictly.

Bjorn
--
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/