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:	Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:17:21 +0100
From:	Peter Stuge <>
To:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Sarah Sharp <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	David Miller <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] usb: Tell xhci when usb data might be

David Laight wrote:
> Some xhci (USB3) controllers have a constraint on the offset within a
> bulk transfer of the end of the transfer ring.


> code using libusb can generate arbitrarily long transfers that usually
> get split into 8k fragments.

libusb splits transfers into 16k urbs, or doesn't with newer code
when both kernel and libusb support scatter-gather.

> In fact libusb always uses 8k fragments.

Hm? Worst-case libusb-1.0 submits 16k urbs. libusb-0.1 I'm unsure
about, but could check.

When both sides support it, scatter-gather is used and a single urb
is submitted.

IIRC usbfs doesn't mess with urb buffers at all.

Where's the 8k coming from?

> This all means that the xhci driver needs to accept unlimited numbers
> of 'aligned' fragments and only restrict the number of misaligned ones.

libusb applications have so far never made efforts to align their
buffers to anything. That seems to become relevant for zero-copy?

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