netdev - Re: [PATCH 01/10] smc91x: remove unused code enclosed by #ifdef CONFIG

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0806270941460.2979@xanadu.home>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:48:34 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Nicolas Pitre <nico@....org>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Eric Miao <eric.miao@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] smc91x: remove unused code enclosed by #ifdef
 CONFIG_ISA .. #endif

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> Eric Miao wrote:
> > Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > Eric Miao wrote:
> > > > Apparently, the code enclosed by #ifdef CONFIG_ISA .. #endif are no
> > > > longer
> > > > used
> > > What does this mean?
> > > 
> > > CONFIG_ISA platforms still exist, and one presumes that the ISA hardware
> > > still exists.
> > > 
> > > Is this hardware covered by another driver?
> > > 
> > 
> > Well, I assume the original code tends to support ISA with module
> > parameters to setup the IO address base and IRQ etc. But obviously,
> > those part of the code is now totally invalid and confusing only.
> > 
> > Should there be requirement of supporting ISA hardware with this
> > chip, the driver is actually unable to, and I prefer to re-write
> > that part of the code if necessary.
> > 
> > BTW: I don't know any ISA NIC with a SMC91X chip by far, and I
> > cannot infer by the driver code itself what type of ISA NIC it
> > is supporting.
> 
> These are questions that must be researched...
> 
> Where did the ISA support come from?

>From the original driver before I started maintaining it years ago.

> Was it copied from another driver, or did it actually work on real hardware at
> some point in the past?

It did work on real hardware since, originally, the SMC91C9x chips were 
found on ISA cards only.

> If the latter, when did ISA support stop working?  i.e. a regression occurred

Long long ago I'm afraid.  I even sent a call for help from someone with 
an actual ISA card a couple years ago with no response.  I suspect ISA 
support has been broken for quite a while now and no one ever 
complained.

> Certainly if the driver has -never- worked on ISA hardware, then the code
> should be removed.  Who knows the definitive answer?  What does the driver
> look like in older (pre-2.6.12) kernels?

I started hacking on that driver in the 2.4.x days, and I suspect I 
could have broken ISA at that time.


Nicolas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html