linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ata: libahci_platform: Remove bogus 32-bit DMA mask attempt

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: <YbOr0Y7qacDmCg73@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:34:41 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ata: libahci_platform: Remove bogus 32-bit DMA
 mask attempt

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 04:59:37PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> If 64-bit mask attempt fails, the 32-bit will fail by the very same reason.
> Don't even try the latter. It's a continuation of the changes that contains,
> e.g. dcc02c19cc06 ("sata_sil24: use dma_set_mask_and_coherent").

I understand that some people have nothing besides bikeshedding, but this patch
seems fine to everybody, am I right? Can it be applied (it's independent from
patch 1 anyways)?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko