linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] VMD: Attach vmd resources to parent domain's resource tree

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]

Message-ID: <20160223234710.GA8670@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 23 Feb 2016 16:47:10 -0700
From:	Jon Derrick <jonathan.derrick@...el.com>
To:	Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
Cc:	helgaas@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	bryan.e.veal@...el.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, dan.j.williams@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VMD: Attach vmd resources to parent domain's resource
 tree

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:16:11PM +0000, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 02:50:13PM -0700, Jon Derrick wrote:
> > This patch attaches the new VMD domain's resources to the VMD device's
> > resources. This allows /proc/iomem to display a more complete picture.
> > 
> > Before:
> >   c0000000-c1ffffff : 0000:5d:05.5
> >   c2000000-c3ffffff : 0000:5d:05.5
> >     c2010000-c2013fff : nvme
> >   c4000000-c40fffff : 0000:5d:05.5
> > 
> > After:
> >   c0000000-c1ffffff : 0000:5d:05.5
> >     c0000000-0000001f : VMD CFGBAR
> >   c2000000-c3ffffff : 0000:5d:05.5
> >     c2000000-c3ffffff : VMD MEMBAR1
> >       c2000000-c22fffff : PCI Bus 10000:01
> >         c2000000-c200ffff : 10000:01:00.0
> >         c2010000-c2013fff : 10000:01:00.0
> >           c2010000-c2013fff : nvme
> >       c2300000-c24fffff : PCI Bus 10000:01
> >   c4000000-c40fffff : 0000:5d:05.5
> >     c4002000-c40fffff : VMD MEMBAR2
> 
> I think we should drop the CFGBAR from here since that's a bus resource
> rather than IO memory. Otherwise, this looks good and useful.
Yes that entry doesn't make much sense for iomem does it. I'll drop that part.

> 
> I think in the near future we should come up with a better name than
> "VMD MEMBAR" to help distinguish multiple VMD's in a system.
Seconded. I'm fine with naming it by its PCI designator, eg 10000:01:00.0, and maybe a bar designator after that (or not).