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  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]
Date:	Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:52:05 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Joseph Jezak <josejx@...too.org>
Cc:	Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Larry Finger <larry.finger@...inger.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, Bcm43xx-dev@...ts.berlios.de,
	John Linville <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm43xx: Fix code for spec changes of 2/7/2007

On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 14:55 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote:

> Well, here's the problem.  There are a few places where a value is 
> changed (different value written to a register).  Does this mean 
> that the value is different due to the uCode changes (can't tell, no 
> documentation)? 

From what I've seen in the ucode that question isn't really too hard to
answer: as long as it's not in the shared memory or ucode register space
the ucode can't really have an influence.

>  Is it applicable to all revisions (can't tell, some 
> revisions are not supported in this version)?  

Best bet would be to make it conditional right now and have someone test
for these cases with older hw.

> If the revision 
> number range in a check changes is that because of a difference in 
> supported cards or a bug fix?

Hmm. Same I guess, use the new check for new hw and the old check for
old hw, i.e. assume it's the former and not a bug fix (until tested
otherwise.)

I think our best bet is to treat the older hw the same as the older
driver does.

A bigger problem, IMO, is that we'd have to support all the older
microcode things which is a bit tricky since things in shm have moved a
lot... Maybe we should find a third maintainer who has access to a
couple of old cards :)

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (191 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists