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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:01:41 +0000
From:	Liviu Dudau <liviu@...au.co.uk>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
	linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] arm64: Add architecture support for PCI

On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 01:17:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 06 March 2014, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 10:28:51PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 04 March 2014, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > > 
> > > > +extern int isa_dma_bridge_buggy;
> > > 
> > > As commented before, I still think we can hardcode this to off
> > 
> > Unfortunately that doesn't work when you have CONFIG_PCI=y. drivers/pci/pci.c has:
> > 
> > drivers/pci/pci.c:int isa_dma_bridge_buggy;
> > drivers/pci/pci.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(isa_dma_bridge_buggy);
> > 
> > and drivers/pci/quirks.c does:
> > 
> > drivers/pci/quirks.c:   if (!isa_dma_bridge_buggy) {
> > drivers/pci/quirks.c:           isa_dma_bridge_buggy=1;
> > drivers/pci/quirks.c-           dev_info(&dev->dev, "Activating ISA DMA hang workarounds\n");
> > drivers/pci/quirks.c-   }
> > 
> 
> Ah, I see. Should we maybe move the declaration to a more generic header
> file then? If the architectures cannot override it anyway, it shouldn't
> be up to the architecture to declare it.

Yes, it's one of those cleanup jobs that seems that no one wants to take on.
I'm reluctant to deal with it here as it would easily double the size of the
patchset, so I'm currently playing along like all other architectures.

Liviu

> 
> 	Arnd
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

--
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