On 04/21/2010 05:02 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 04/21/2010 04:43 PM, Yinghai wrote: >> >> then use -v3 please >> >> -v4: also don't trim [0xa0000, 0x100000] for mrst. >> > > That makes a lot of sense for 2.6.34. I agree with moving the trimming > into subsystems, but I think it's .35 material at this point. > > [Cc: Jacob Pan] > >>> >>> The use of a string match in: >>> >>> + if (check_child && !conflict->child && strstr(conflict->name, >>> "PCI Bus")) >>> ^^^^^^^^^ >>> >>> ... screams "wrong! ugly! bad!" in my opinion. I utterly fail to see >>> how that could be acceptable under any circumstances. I thought that >>> had been flagged earlier in the conversation, but it is apparently still >>> there. >> >> the string checking is to make sure pci device that is hooked into bus0 directly, but pci bar is falling into >> 0xa0000 - 0x100000. So can not put "reserved" holder under them. >> > > It makes me extremely concerned, because such hacks tend to be extremely > vulnerable. Strings are designed primarily for human consumption, and > "find string inside another string" is *very* much so. As such, I > really would like to understand that there isn't any more sensible way, > such as a flag, that can be used to accomplish the objective. pass function pointer to additional checking? YH -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
