linux-kernel - Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme host due to scope mismatch

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46d15bd6-4b50-d0cb-e0b8-763a808c4de8@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Dec 2019 10:00:54 +0800
From:   Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Jim,Yan" <jimyan@...du.com>,
        Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
Cc:     "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme host due to scope mismatch

Hi,

On 2019/12/25 9:52, Jim,Yan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> 发件人: Lu Baolu [mailto:baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com]
>> 发送时间: 2019年12月24日 19:27
>> 收件人: Jim,Yan <jimyan@...du.com>; Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
>> 抄送: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> 主题: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme host due
>> to scope mismatch
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2019/12/24 16:18, Jim,Yan wrote:
>>>>>> For both cases, a quirk flag seems to be more reasonable, so that
>>>>>> unrelated devices will not be impacted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> baolu
>>>>> Hi Baolu,
>>>>> 	Thanks for your advice. And I modify the patch as follow.
>>>> I just posted a patch for both NTG and NVME cases. Can you please take a
>> look?
>>>> Does it work for you?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> baolu
>>>>
>>> I have tested your patch. It does work for me. But I prefer my second version,
>> it is more flexible, and may use for similar unknown devices.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't get your point. Do you mind explaining why it's more flexible?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Baolu
> For example, an unknown device has a normal PCI header and bridge scope and a class of PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI.
> These devices do have a class of PCI_BASE_CLASS_BRIDGE in common.

This is not a common case. It's only for devices on the marketing and
hard for the VT-d users to get it fixed in the OEM firmware.

Best regards,
baolu