linux-kernel - RE: ACPI OSI disaster on latest HP laptops

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, 25 Jul 2008 15:19:24 -0700
From:	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>
To:	"Eric Piel" <eric.piel@...mplin-utc.net>,
	"Len Brown" <lenb@...nel.org>, "Lin, Ming M" <ming.m.lin@...el.com>
Cc:	"Thomas Renninger" <trenn@...e.de>,
	"Arjan van de Ven" <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-acpi" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Andi Kleen" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Christian Kornacker" <ckornacker@...e.de>
Subject: RE: ACPI OSI disaster on latest HP laptops - critical temperature shutdown

The goal for ACPICA has gone from being a complete "reference
implementation" of the ACPI specification to being a "Windows
bug-for-bug compatible" ACPI implementation.

So when we report _OS("Microsoft Windows NT") and respond OK to all _OSI
queries with Microsoft strings, we mean it.

Bob


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Eric Piel [mailto:eric.piel@...mplin-utc.net]
>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 3:11 PM
>To: Len Brown
>Cc: Thomas Renninger; Arjan van de Ven; linux-acpi; Moore, Robert;
Linux
>Kernel Mailing List; Andi Kleen; Christian Kornacker
>Subject: Re: ACPI OSI disaster on latest HP laptops - critical
temperature
>shutdown
>
>Len Brown schreef:
>> Thomas,
>>
>> re: OSI(Windows...)
>>
>> Linux will continue to claim OSI compatibility with Windows
>> until the day when the majority of Linux systems
>> have passed a Linux compatibility test rather than
>> a Windows compatibility test.
>>
>> Re: OSI(Linux)
>>
>> I've looked at O(100) DSDT's that look at OSI(Linux),
>> and all but serveral systems from two vendors do it by mistake.
>> They simply copied it from the bugged Intel reference code.
>>
>> OSI(Linux) will _never_ be restored to Linux, ever.
>>
>Just out of curiosity, let's imagine that today HP decides to fix its
>BIOS. What would be the way to do it? Of course, without putting
>additional problems when Windows is booted.
>
>What they would want is to provide workarounds for each given version
of
>Windows and provide a completely ACPI-compliant version when Linux is
>running. I fail to see how it is possible possible to do that today.
>Well... they could detect Linux by checking that several OSI's for
>Windows pass, but that would be really a nasty kludge.
>
>So, am I understanding correctly that we are in a desperate need for a
>good OSI solution? Until then, we can only bash and complain at the
BIOS
>developers, but they have no way to fix the problems.
>
>Eric
--
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/