linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] ACPI PCI slot detection driver

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]

Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:33:00 +0900
From:	Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>,
	Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@...el.com>,
	Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com>, warthog19@...lescrag.net,
	rick.jones2@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ACPI PCI slot detection driver

Hi Alex-san,

> On my machine, it is legal to evaluate S1F0._SUN independent of
> S1F0._STA because L001._INI has already been evaluated.
> 
> It would be helpful to know what Fujitsu's namespace looks like.
> If Fujitsu slot objects contain _STA and _INI, then I agree with
> Kenji-san -- I definitely need to check _STA before evaluating
> _SUN.

Thank you for explanation. Maybe I understood the summary of
implementation of HP firmware. But how to use or where to put _INI
method in the ACPI namespace never becomes reasonable reason why
your driver may ignore _STA before evaluating _SUN.

> But in any case, I think both HP and Fujitsu firmware are doing
> legal things -- neither firmware is breaking the spec.

My understanding of your explanation so far is:

- evaluating _SUN without checking _STA doesn't cause problem,
  from the view point of HP's implementation.
- some IBM machine is doing same as HP

I never think those are reasonable reasons why ignoring _STA
before evaluating _SUN is legal. Am I missing something?

> If one list is shorter than the other, then that should be the
> list to put in the kernel, and the default behavior should be
> "majority rule".

I don't want to consider "majority rule" before I understand why
ignoring _STA is legal.

Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige

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