linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] PCI: Make specifying PCI devices in kernel parameters reusable

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: <CAHp75VefSEvpUvsdi=W6rEiOX01zaJeMtxQMDqmSthPJP3uJFA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jun 2018 02:06:36 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Documentation List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] PCI: Make specifying PCI devices in kernel
 parameters reusable

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Alex Williamson
<alex.williamson@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:36:34 -0600
> Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com> wrote:

> I realize this is not a change in behavior, but since we're spelling it
> out in a proper comment rather than burying it in the implementation,
> using 0 as a wildcard is rather questionable behavior.  It always
> surprises me when I read this because pci_match_one_device() uses
> PCI_ANY_ID (~0) as a wildcard and as a result of struct pci_device_id
> using __u32 for these fields, we actually need to specify ffffffff on
> the commandline to get a wildcard match for dynamic ids.  The latter is
> tedious to use, but I think it's more correct, and the use of a __u32 is
> probably attributed to the fact that 0xffff is only reserved for vendor
> ID, the spec doesn't seem to reserve any entries from the vendor's
> device ID range.
>
> There's probably really no path to resolve these, but acknowledging the
> difference in this comment block might be helpful in the future.

...or introduce a parser part to allow user supply "any" instead of
numeric value.

>> +                     pr_info("PCI: Can't parse resource_alignment parameter: pci:%s\n",

> The "pci:" prefix on %s doesn't make sense now, it was used above when
> the pointer was already advanced past this token, now I believe it would
> lead to "pci:pci:xxxx:yyyy" or "pci:xx:yy.z".  Thanks,

I'm just wondering if we can use pci_info() here, Or it makes no sense?
Also, the original loglevel was an "error".

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko