linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: Enlarge IO_SPACE

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: <YJnq3Y3/I1kdV1Ov@casper.infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 11 May 2021 03:24:29 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc:     Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Abbott Liu <liuwenliang@...wei.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: Enlarge IO_SPACE_LIMIT needed for some SoC

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 04:16:54AM +0200, Ansuel Smith wrote:
> Ipq8064 SoC requires larger IO_SPACE_LIMIT on second and third pci port.

Do you really?  I mean, yes, theoretically, I understand it, the
hardware supports 64kB of I/O port space per root port.  But I/O
port space is rather deprecated these days.  My laptop has precisely
two devices with I/O ports, one with 64 bytes and the other with 32
bytes.  Would you really suffer by allocating 16kB of I/O port
space to each root port?