linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ahci: remove duplicated PCI device IDs

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]

Date:   Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:03:46 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexandra Yates <alexandra.yates@...ux.intel.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ahci: remove duplicated PCI device IDs

On 17/09/2021 13:21, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2021/09/17 19:24, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Intel devices 0x2822, 0x2823, 0x2826 and 0x2827 are already on the list
>> as Lewisburg AHCI/RAID.  They use same configuration except 0x2822 which
>> has board_ahci_nosntf (for ICH8).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Not tested.
> 
> I cannot test this either. I do not have this hardware. No chance of getting
> this tested by someone ?
> 
> Changes for 0x2823, 0x2826 and 0x2827 seem OK, but 0x2822 is weird.
> Since it is replicated, I think that the second entry was in fact never used as
> the first one would be a hit before the second. So shouldn't we keep the first
> entry with board_ahci_nosntf and remove the second one with board_ahci ?

The second 0x2822 entry was added by Alexandra Yates
<alexandra.yates@...ux.intel.com>.

However first entry was added with much bigger explanation by Shaohua Li
<shaohua.li@...el.com>, where he/she tested it.

Indeed it points to using board_ahci_nosntf.

Best regards,
Krzysztof