linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: add "auto" to acpi_enforce

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:	Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:33:21 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@...il.com>
Cc:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: add "auto" to acpi_enforce_resources

On Sun 2009-03-29 22:16:17, Luca Tettamanti wrote:
> Il Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 02:21:21PM +0100, Hans de Goede ha scritto: 
> > On 03/24/2009 01:39 PM, Luca Tettamanti wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Pavel Machek<pavel@....cz>  wrote:
> >>> Hi!
> >>>
> >>>>> For the record we have changed the default to strict in Fedora's
> >>>>> development branch, for 2 weeks or so now, including in the recently
> >>>>> released Fedora 11 release and we've had 0 complaints so far.
> >>>> Well, if the number of affected systems is small, this is good news.
> >>>> But this is only 2 weeks and one distribution, coverage isn't
> >>>> sufficient to claim anything yet IMHO.
> >>>>
> >>>> That being said... if there's a common consensus that switching to
> >>>> strict and dealing with fallouts is the best thing to do, and I'm the
> >>>> only one objecting to this, then I am ready to admit that I was wrong
> >>>> and let you proceed.
> >>> I believe that 'enable strict, deal with fallout' is the best
> >>> long-term strategy...
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >> the merge window for .30 is now open, what are we going to do with this issue?
> >>
> >
> > I think the consensus was to make the default strict and to merge the atk0110
> > driver, right?
> 
> Ok,
> here's a patch:
> ---
> The following patch changes the default value for option "acpi_enforce_resource"
> to strict. It enforces strict resource checking - disallowing access by native
> drivers to IO ports and memory regions claimed by ACPI firmware.
> 
> The patch is mainly aimed to block native hwmon drivers from touching
> monitoring chips that ACPI thinks it own.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@...il.com>

Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>

> Index: b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> ===================================================================
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt	2009-03-29 15:47:28.000000000 +0200
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt	2009-03-29 15:51:30.000000000 +0200
> @@ -259,6 +259,22 @@
>  			to assume that this machine's pmtimer latches its value
>  			and always returns good values.
>  
> +	acpi_enforce_resources=	[ACPI]
> +			{ strict,  lax, no }
			          ~ extra space here... probably not
worth fixing.
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/