linux-kernel - Re: [Patch] IBM Real-Time "SMI Free" mode driver -v7

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:	Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:09:28 -0700
From:	Vernon Mauery <vernux@...ibm.com>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Linux Documentation <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Platform driver x86 <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch] IBM Real-Time "SMI Free" mode driver -v7

On 21-Oct-2010 03:42 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 07:38:21AM -0700, Vernon Mauery wrote:
>> On 21-Oct-2010 03:25 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> Oops, sorry! I mean running on older kernels.
>>
>> Do older kernels not have DMI support?  I would think that if an
>> enterprise distribution wanted this driver they would likely already
>> have DMI support backported as well.
>
>I mean that they may run the current driver on newer hardware that isn't
>in the DMI table, and that may be the only thing preventing it from
>working.
>
>>> I'd suggest using DMI to verify that it's an IBM, and perhaps also using
>>> DMI to check that it's a server or blade rather than a laptop or
>>> desktop. After that you could just check the ebda rather than having to
>>> have an entry for every specific machine.
>>
>> I went for a better safe than sorry route.  Before I added the DMI
>> checking I had some reports of this getting loaded on non-IBM hardware
>> and it came up with some nasty error messages.  I figured since I knew
>> exactly which platforms have support, I could just limit the driver to
>> those.  Then there is the force parameter that allows a user to ignore
>> the DMI data and try to load the driver anyway.
>
>It's preferable to have the driver be able to support future hardware
>built to the same spec without having to add extra IDs. It's easy to
>make sure that you're loading on an IBM server - are there any of these
>that have the _RTL_ header but will break?

No, if it has the _RTL_ header it should be fine.  I was more concerned 
about the driver trying to map the EBDA and reading through it on 
non-ibm platforms, so I guess just a check to see that it is IBM should 
be sufficient.  Let me get a patch that does that.

--Vernon
--
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/