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]
Date:	Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:38:39 -0500
From:	Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...onical.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: Only enable realloc auto when root bus has 64bit
 mmio

On 12/11/2013 02:55 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Joseph Salisbury
> <joseph.salisbury@...onical.com> wrote:
>> On 12/09/2013 03:10 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>> That doesn't answer my question at all.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that this change makes it so Joseph doesn't have to use
>>>> "pci=realloc=off".  But why should auto-reallocation be limited to
>>>> buses that have resources above 4GB?  That doesn't make any sense.
>>>>
>>>> We should fix the reallocation code so it can deal with this case.  If
>>>> there's not enough space for everything, obviously we have to leave
>>>> something unassigned.  A ROM BAR is a good candidate for leaving
>>>> unassigned, because most of the time we can get along without it.
>>> Yes, that is ideal and not that simple.
>>> but that would be hard to backport to old kernels.
>>>
>>> BTW, Joseph, can you try
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git
>>> for-pci-3.14
>>> with pci=realloc=on
>>>
>>> on that system?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Yinghai
>> I noticed there was some back and forth on this thread.  Do you still
>> want me to test this version, Yinghai?
> Yes, if that works, we would not need to put the patch in upstream for limiting
> realloc auto scope.
>
> Thanks
>
> Yinghai
Hi Yinghai,

Sorry for the delay.  The bug reporter was finally able to test your
patch.  He reports that this version of the patch does in fact fix the
bug.  See comment #72 here:

http://pad.lv/1245938

Thanks again for all your help!

Joe

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ