netdev - Re: [PATCH] r8169: default to 64-bit DMA on systems without memory below 4 GB

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

Message-ID: <20160512203753.GA8550@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
Date:	Thu, 12 May 2016 22:37:53 +0200
From:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
To:	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"<netdev@...r.kernel.org>" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ricardo Salveti <ricardo.salveti@...aro.org>,
	Leo Duran <leo.duran@....com>,
	G Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
	Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	Chunhao Lin <hau@...ltek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] r8169: default to 64-bit DMA on systems without memory
 below 4 GB

Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> :
> On 12 May 2016 at 16:09, Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com> wrote:
[...]
> By resurrecting 353176888386, I mean the patch that changes the
> default for PCI express devices, so I think we are in agreement here ?

Almost 353176888386: please modify it so that there's no change of
behavior for mac_version < RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_18.

It will avoid a bit more than the plain old PCI chipsets, including the
one that caused 353176888386 reversal as well as a few one that I don't
feel confortable with due to their vicinity with the original 8169.

[...]
> > A few news from the "pathologically better safe than sorry" squad:
> > I have switched the default on a couple of non-critical production
> > servers that include 8168c (RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_22). It should give an hint
> > for hardware from 2008 ~ 2009. I'll do some basic sanity testing with
> > different chipsets.
> >
> 
> Thanks for testing that. In the mean time, I will dust off the patch
> and rebase it to today's -next.

8106e (RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_39) doesn't exhibit any difference of behavior
either.

-- 
Ueimor