netdev - Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] pci: Add dev_flags bit to access VPD through function 0

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:47:35 +0000
From:	"Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
To:	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
CC:	"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] pci: Add dev_flags bit to access VPD through
 function 0

> On Sep 15, 2015, at 2:17 PM, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> Also, rather than clearing the flag, can we move the tests done by
> pci_vpd_f0_dev_check() into the
> quirk setup function?  It seems like function 0 should be sufficiently
> configured by the time we're probing non-zero functions that we can be
> more selective in setting the flag rather than unsetting it later.

I guess I was being very conservative in not assuming anything about the state of other devices at that point. Things seem to be increasingly parallel all the time and I am not deeply involved in the evolution of the PCI subsystem. If you want to make that assumption, I would suggest that pci_vpd_f0_dev_check remain a separate function called by the quirk setup so that it can be used by other quirk setup functions as well.

--
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (842 bytes)