linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] (almost) booting allyesconfig -- please don't poke super-io without request

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:	Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:36:50 +0200
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@....nl>
Cc:	Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	Samuel Ortiz <samuel@...tiz.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	lm-sensors@...sensors.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] (almost) booting allyesconfig -- please  don't poke
 super-io  without request_region

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:27:26 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Jean Delvare wrote:
> > Hi Hans, hi Milton,
> > 
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >> One could make a superio driver, and create sub-devices for the IR, 
> >> I2C, floppy, parallel, etc
> >> nodes.
> > 
> > There have been proposals to do this, and this would indeed be a very
> > good idea, but unfortunately nobody took the time to implement this
> > properly, push it upstream and volunteer to maintain it. The problem is
> > that you don't need just a "driver", but a new subsystem, that needs to
> > be designed and maintained.
> 
> Well, I believe there have been some lightweight superio locking coordinator 
> patches been floating around on the lm_sensors list, and I have reviewed them 
> and then a new version was done with my issues fixed.
> 
> I kinda liked the proposed solution there, it was quite simple, moved all the 
> generic superio stuff into generic superio code, and added locking for super io 
> access from multiple drivers, what ever happened to those patches?

As far as I know, nothing, and this is the problem. Somebody needs to
step up and call him/herself the maintainer of the new code, and push
it upstream and convert all the drivers (hwmon, watchdog, parallel
port...) to make use of it. And I am not the one to do this, I am busy
enough as is with i2c and hwmon.

> If were to start using those, we could actually do a request region and then 
> never release it, as things should be.

Yes, if we have a superio access coordinator, it can request the region
and not release it. But as long as we don't have that, I agree with
Milton that the individual drivers should temporarily request the
Super-I/O region before accessing it.

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
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/