Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1260724 > unrolled thread

Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t overflow with 32-bit kernel

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t  overflow with 32-bit kernel Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org> - 2015-11-02 16:30 +0100
    Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t  overflow with 32-bit kernel Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com> - 2015-11-05 14:00 +0100
      Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t  overflow with 32-bit kernel Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> - 2015-11-05 14:30 +0100
        Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t  overflow with 32-bit kernel Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org> - 2015-11-05 15:00 +0100

#1260724 — Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t overflow with 32-bit kernel

On 08.07.2015 09:26, Jiang Liu wrote:
> Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression:
>    "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID
>     1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver loaded
>     the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived with
>     considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible.
>     The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power
>     down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the
>     power button for 4 seconds to power it down.
>
>     The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because of this,
>     either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after rebooting,
>     the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM
>     announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat
>     some sense back to the computer.
>
>     The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final. 3.18.16 was
>     good."
>
> The regression is caused by commit 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common
> ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation"). Since commit
> 593669c2ac0f, x86 PCI ACPI host bridge driver validates ACPI resources by
> first converting an ACPI resource to a 'struct resource' structure and
> then applying checks against the converted resource structure. The 'start'
> and 'end' fields in 'struct resource' are defined to be type of
> resource_size_t, which may be 32 bits or 64 bits depending on
> CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT.
>
> This may cause incorrect resource validation results with 32-bit kernels
> because 64-bit ACPI resource descriptors may get truncated when converting
> to 32-bit 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource'. It eventually
> affects PCI resource allocation subsystem and makes some PCI devices and
> the system behave abnormally due to incorrect resource assignment.
>
> So enhance the ACPI resource parsing interfaces to ignore ACPI resource
> descriptors with address/offset above 4G when running in 32-bit mode.
>
> With the fix applied, the behavior of the machine was restored to how
> 3.18.16 worked, i.e. the memory range that is over 4GB is ignored again,
> and lspci -vvxxx shows that everything is at the same memory window as
> they were with 3.18.16.
>
> Reported-and-Tested-by: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>
> Fixes: 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation")
> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0
> ---
>   drivers/acpi/resource.c |   24 +++++++++++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> index 10561ce16ed1..e8d281739cbc 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win,
>   	u8 iodec = attr->granularity == 0xfff ? ACPI_DECODE_10 : ACPI_DECODE_16;
>   	bool wp = addr->info.mem.write_protect;
>   	u64 len = attr->address_length;
> +	u64 start, end, offset = 0;
>   	struct resource *res = &win->res;
>
>   	/*
> @@ -205,9 +206,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win,
>   		pr_debug("ACPI: Invalid address space min_addr_fix %d, max_addr_fix %d, len %llx\n",
>   			 addr->min_address_fixed, addr->max_address_fixed, len);
>
> -	res->start = attr->minimum;
> -	res->end = attr->maximum;
> -
>   	/*
>   	 * For bridges that translate addresses across the bridge,
>   	 * translation_offset is the offset that must be added to the
> @@ -215,12 +213,22 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win,
>   	 * primary side. Non-bridge devices must list 0 for all Address
>   	 * Translation offset bits.
>   	 */
> -	if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) {
> -		res->start += attr->translation_offset;
> -		res->end += attr->translation_offset;
> -	} else if (attr->translation_offset) {
> +	if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER)
> +		offset = attr->translation_offset;
> +	else if (attr->translation_offset)
>   		pr_debug("ACPI: translation_offset(%lld) is invalid for non-bridge device.\n",
>   			 attr->translation_offset);
> +	start = attr->minimum + offset;
> +	end = attr->maximum + offset;

I still see the issue for this area, I mean ACPI_IO_RANGE. You are 
adding translation offset to attr->minimum, build resource structure 
which is then passed to acpi_dev_ioresource_flags and compared against 
0x10003. It causes some IO ranges to be ignored.

> +
> +	win->offset = offset;
> +	res->start = start;
> +	res->end = end;
> +	if (sizeof(resource_size_t) < sizeof(u64) &&
> +	    (offset != win->offset || start != res->start || end != res->end)) {
> +		pr_warn("acpi resource window ([%#llx-%#llx] ignored, not CPU addressable)\n",
> +			attr->minimum, attr->maximum);
> +		return false;
>   	}
>
>   	switch (addr->resource_type) {
> @@ -237,8 +245,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win,
>   		return false;
>   	}
>
> -	win->offset = attr->translation_offset;
> -
>   	if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER)
>   		res->flags |= IORESOURCE_WINDOW;
>
>

Thanks,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1263180

On 02.11.2015 16:27, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> On 08.07.2015 09:26, Jiang Liu wrote:
>> Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression:
>>    "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID
>>     1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver
>> loaded
>>     the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived
>> with
>>     considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible.
>>     The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power
>>     down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the
>>     power button for 4 seconds to power it down.
>>
>>     The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because
>> of this,
>>     either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after
>> rebooting,
>>     the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM
>>     announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat
>>     some sense back to the computer.
>>
>>     The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final.
>> 3.18.16 was
>>     good."
>>
>> The regression is caused by commit 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use
>> common
>> ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation"). Since commit
>> 593669c2ac0f, x86 PCI ACPI host bridge driver validates ACPI resources by
>> first converting an ACPI resource to a 'struct resource' structure and
>> then applying checks against the converted resource structure. The
>> 'start'
>> and 'end' fields in 'struct resource' are defined to be type of
>> resource_size_t, which may be 32 bits or 64 bits depending on
>> CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT.
>>
>> This may cause incorrect resource validation results with 32-bit kernels
>> because 64-bit ACPI resource descriptors may get truncated when
>> converting
>> to 32-bit 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource'. It eventually
>> affects PCI resource allocation subsystem and makes some PCI devices and
>> the system behave abnormally due to incorrect resource assignment.
>>
>> So enhance the ACPI resource parsing interfaces to ignore ACPI resource
>> descriptors with address/offset above 4G when running in 32-bit mode.
>>
>> With the fix applied, the behavior of the machine was restored to how
>> 3.18.16 worked, i.e. the memory range that is over 4GB is ignored again,
>> and lspci -vvxxx shows that everything is at the same memory window as
>> they were with 3.18.16.
>>
>> Reported-and-Tested-by: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>
>> Fixes: 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource
>> interfaces to simplify implementation")
>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0
>> ---
>>   drivers/acpi/resource.c |   24 +++++++++++++++---------
>>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>> index 10561ce16ed1..e8d281739cbc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>> *win,
>>       u8 iodec = attr->granularity == 0xfff ? ACPI_DECODE_10 :
>> ACPI_DECODE_16;
>>       bool wp = addr->info.mem.write_protect;
>>       u64 len = attr->address_length;
>> +    u64 start, end, offset = 0;
>>       struct resource *res = &win->res;
>>
>>       /*
>> @@ -205,9 +206,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>> *win,
>>           pr_debug("ACPI: Invalid address space min_addr_fix %d,
>> max_addr_fix %d, len %llx\n",
>>                addr->min_address_fixed, addr->max_address_fixed, len);
>>
>> -    res->start = attr->minimum;
>> -    res->end = attr->maximum;
>> -
>>       /*
>>        * For bridges that translate addresses across the bridge,
>>        * translation_offset is the offset that must be added to the
>> @@ -215,12 +213,22 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct
>> resource_win *win,
>>        * primary side. Non-bridge devices must list 0 for all Address
>>        * Translation offset bits.
>>        */
>> -    if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) {
>> -        res->start += attr->translation_offset;
>> -        res->end += attr->translation_offset;
>> -    } else if (attr->translation_offset) {
>> +    if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER)
>> +        offset = attr->translation_offset;
>> +    else if (attr->translation_offset)
>>           pr_debug("ACPI: translation_offset(%lld) is invalid for
>> non-bridge device.\n",
>>                attr->translation_offset);
>> +    start = attr->minimum + offset;
>> +    end = attr->maximum + offset;
>
> I still see the issue for this area, I mean ACPI_IO_RANGE. You are
> adding translation offset to attr->minimum, build resource structure
> which is then passed to acpi_dev_ioresource_flags and compared against
> 0x10003. It causes some IO ranges to be ignored.
>

Kindly reminder, any comments?

Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1263198

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2015/11/5 20:53, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> On 02.11.2015 16:27, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> On 08.07.2015 09:26, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>> Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression:
>>>    "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID
>>>     1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver
>>> loaded
>>>     the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived
>>> with
>>>     considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible.
>>>     The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power
>>>     down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the
>>>     power button for 4 seconds to power it down.
>>>
>>>     The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because
>>> of this,
>>>     either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after
>>> rebooting,
>>>     the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM
>>>     announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to
>>> beat
>>>     some sense back to the computer.
>>>
>>>     The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final.
>>> 3.18.16 was
>>>     good."
>>>
>>> The regression is caused by commit 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use
>>> common
>>> ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation"). Since commit
>>> 593669c2ac0f, x86 PCI ACPI host bridge driver validates ACPI
>>> resources by
>>> first converting an ACPI resource to a 'struct resource' structure and
>>> then applying checks against the converted resource structure. The
>>> 'start'
>>> and 'end' fields in 'struct resource' are defined to be type of
>>> resource_size_t, which may be 32 bits or 64 bits depending on
>>> CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT.
>>>
>>> This may cause incorrect resource validation results with 32-bit kernels
>>> because 64-bit ACPI resource descriptors may get truncated when
>>> converting
>>> to 32-bit 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource'. It eventually
>>> affects PCI resource allocation subsystem and makes some PCI devices and
>>> the system behave abnormally due to incorrect resource assignment.
>>>
>>> So enhance the ACPI resource parsing interfaces to ignore ACPI resource
>>> descriptors with address/offset above 4G when running in 32-bit mode.
>>>
>>> With the fix applied, the behavior of the machine was restored to how
>>> 3.18.16 worked, i.e. the memory range that is over 4GB is ignored again,
>>> and lspci -vvxxx shows that everything is at the same memory window as
>>> they were with 3.18.16.
>>>
>>> Reported-and-Tested-by: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>
>>> Fixes: 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource
>>> interfaces to simplify implementation")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/acpi/resource.c |   24 +++++++++++++++---------
>>>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>> index 10561ce16ed1..e8d281739cbc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>>> *win,
>>>       u8 iodec = attr->granularity == 0xfff ? ACPI_DECODE_10 :
>>> ACPI_DECODE_16;
>>>       bool wp = addr->info.mem.write_protect;
>>>       u64 len = attr->address_length;
>>> +    u64 start, end, offset = 0;
>>>       struct resource *res = &win->res;
>>>
>>>       /*
>>> @@ -205,9 +206,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>>> *win,
>>>           pr_debug("ACPI: Invalid address space min_addr_fix %d,
>>> max_addr_fix %d, len %llx\n",
>>>                addr->min_address_fixed, addr->max_address_fixed, len);
>>>
>>> -    res->start = attr->minimum;
>>> -    res->end = attr->maximum;
>>> -
>>>       /*
>>>        * For bridges that translate addresses across the bridge,
>>>        * translation_offset is the offset that must be added to the
>>> @@ -215,12 +213,22 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct
>>> resource_win *win,
>>>        * primary side. Non-bridge devices must list 0 for all Address
>>>        * Translation offset bits.
>>>        */
>>> -    if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) {
>>> -        res->start += attr->translation_offset;
>>> -        res->end += attr->translation_offset;
>>> -    } else if (attr->translation_offset) {
>>> +    if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER)
>>> +        offset = attr->translation_offset;
>>> +    else if (attr->translation_offset)
>>>           pr_debug("ACPI: translation_offset(%lld) is invalid for
>>> non-bridge device.\n",
>>>                attr->translation_offset);
>>> +    start = attr->minimum + offset;
>>> +    end = attr->maximum + offset;
>>
>> I still see the issue for this area, I mean ACPI_IO_RANGE. You are
>> adding translation offset to attr->minimum, build resource structure
>> which is then passed to acpi_dev_ioresource_flags and compared against
>> 0x10003. It causes some IO ranges to be ignored.
>>
> 
> Kindly reminder, any comments?
> 
> Tomasz
Hi Tomasz,
	Thanks for reporting this issue! Could you please help to
test the attached patch?
Thanks,
Gerry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1263221

On 05.11.2015 14:24, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2015/11/5 20:53, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> On 02.11.2015 16:27, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>>> On 08.07.2015 09:26, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>> Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression:
>>>>     "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID
>>>>      1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver
>>>> loaded
>>>>      the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived
>>>> with
>>>>      considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible.
>>>>      The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power
>>>>      down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the
>>>>      power button for 4 seconds to power it down.
>>>>
>>>>      The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because
>>>> of this,
>>>>      either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after
>>>> rebooting,
>>>>      the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM
>>>>      announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to
>>>> beat
>>>>      some sense back to the computer.
>>>>
>>>>      The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final.
>>>> 3.18.16 was
>>>>      good."
>>>>
>>>> The regression is caused by commit 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use
>>>> common
>>>> ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation"). Since commit
>>>> 593669c2ac0f, x86 PCI ACPI host bridge driver validates ACPI
>>>> resources by
>>>> first converting an ACPI resource to a 'struct resource' structure and
>>>> then applying checks against the converted resource structure. The
>>>> 'start'
>>>> and 'end' fields in 'struct resource' are defined to be type of
>>>> resource_size_t, which may be 32 bits or 64 bits depending on
>>>> CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT.
>>>>
>>>> This may cause incorrect resource validation results with 32-bit kernels
>>>> because 64-bit ACPI resource descriptors may get truncated when
>>>> converting
>>>> to 32-bit 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource'. It eventually
>>>> affects PCI resource allocation subsystem and makes some PCI devices and
>>>> the system behave abnormally due to incorrect resource assignment.
>>>>
>>>> So enhance the ACPI resource parsing interfaces to ignore ACPI resource
>>>> descriptors with address/offset above 4G when running in 32-bit mode.
>>>>
>>>> With the fix applied, the behavior of the machine was restored to how
>>>> 3.18.16 worked, i.e. the memory range that is over 4GB is ignored again,
>>>> and lspci -vvxxx shows that everything is at the same memory window as
>>>> they were with 3.18.16.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-and-Tested-by: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>
>>>> Fixes: 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource
>>>> interfaces to simplify implementation")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/acpi/resource.c |   24 +++++++++++++++---------
>>>>    1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>>> index 10561ce16ed1..e8d281739cbc 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>>> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>>>> *win,
>>>>        u8 iodec = attr->granularity == 0xfff ? ACPI_DECODE_10 :
>>>> ACPI_DECODE_16;
>>>>        bool wp = addr->info.mem.write_protect;
>>>>        u64 len = attr->address_length;
>>>> +    u64 start, end, offset = 0;
>>>>        struct resource *res = &win->res;
>>>>
>>>>        /*
>>>> @@ -205,9 +206,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>>>> *win,
>>>>            pr_debug("ACPI: Invalid address space min_addr_fix %d,
>>>> max_addr_fix %d, len %llx\n",
>>>>                 addr->min_address_fixed, addr->max_address_fixed, len);
>>>>
>>>> -    res->start = attr->minimum;
>>>> -    res->end = attr->maximum;
>>>> -
>>>>        /*
>>>>         * For bridges that translate addresses across the bridge,
>>>>         * translation_offset is the offset that must be added to the
>>>> @@ -215,12 +213,22 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct
>>>> resource_win *win,
>>>>         * primary side. Non-bridge devices must list 0 for all Address
>>>>         * Translation offset bits.
>>>>         */
>>>> -    if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) {
>>>> -        res->start += attr->translation_offset;
>>>> -        res->end += attr->translation_offset;
>>>> -    } else if (attr->translation_offset) {
>>>> +    if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER)
>>>> +        offset = attr->translation_offset;
>>>> +    else if (attr->translation_offset)
>>>>            pr_debug("ACPI: translation_offset(%lld) is invalid for
>>>> non-bridge device.\n",
>>>>                 attr->translation_offset);
>>>> +    start = attr->minimum + offset;
>>>> +    end = attr->maximum + offset;
>>>
>>> I still see the issue for this area, I mean ACPI_IO_RANGE. You are
>>> adding translation offset to attr->minimum, build resource structure
>>> which is then passed to acpi_dev_ioresource_flags and compared against
>>> 0x10003. It causes some IO ranges to be ignored.
>>>
>>
>> Kindly reminder, any comments?
>>
>> Tomasz
> Hi Tomasz,
> 	Thanks for reporting this issue! Could you please help to
> test the attached patch?

I was not able to apply your patch directly but that part:
-	if (res->end >= 0x10003)
+	if (res->end - offset >= 0x10003)
  		res->flags |= IORESOURCE_DISABLED | IORESOURCE_UNSET;

definitely helps. Thanks!

Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web