linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Remove End-End TLP as PASID dependency

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]

Date:   Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:11:30 -0400
From:   Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org>
To:     Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@...aro.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, kenneth-lee-2012@...mail.com,
        Wangzhou <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Remove End-End TLP as PASID dependency

On 6/10/2020 4:00 AM, Zhangfei Gao wrote:
>> Why not set the eetlp_prefix_path bit from a PCI quirk?  Unlike the stall
>> problem from the other thread, this one looks like a simple design
>> mistake
>> that can be fixed easily in future iterations of the platform: just set
>> the "End-End TLP Prefix Supported" bit in the Device Capability 2
>> Register
>> of all bridges.
> Yes, we can still set eetlp_prefix_path bit from a PCI quirk.

I agree. Vendor specific quirk should be the way to go here if it is not
compliant with the spec.