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:	Tue, 29 May 2007 14:36:51 -0700
From:	"Gary Zambrano" <>
To:	"Jeff Garzik" <>
cc:	"Michael Buesch" <>,
	"Maximilian Engelhardt" <>,
	"linux-kernel" <>,
	"linux-wireless" <>,
	"Stephen Hemminger" <>,
	"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <>,, "Andrew Morton" <>
Subject: Re: b44: regression in 2.6.22 (resend)

On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 18:39 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> We check for 0xffffffff because that is often how a fault is indicated, 
> when the memory location is read during or immediately after hotplug (or 
> if the PCI bus is truly faulty).  So for most hardware, you see
> tmp = read(irq status)
> if (!tmp)
> 	return irq-none		/* no irq events raised */
> if (tmp == 0xffffffff)
> 	return irq-none		/* hot unplug or h/w fault */
> and the method that determines no interrupt handling is needed.

I guess you are right, but then shouldn't the driver be checking for
faults in other parts of the code too? What if a fault/hotplug occurs
immediately after an interrupt, but before a tx?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists