linux-kernel - Re: SNB PCI root information

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:	Sat, 16 Jun 2012 10:52:51 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
cc:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lenb@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SNB PCI root information

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> We used to have same for intel IOH nehalem,  and get bless from intel.
> but that get removed at some point.

Why so?

> I have one local internal similar patch for SNB iio for crossing check
> if BIOS set correctly.
> but I don't think i will try to get blessing from intel to publish it.

Why do you need Intels blessing to post a useful patch?

Is that patch based on public available documentation and/or your own
findings?

If yes, then hell we don't care whether Intel likes it or not.

If not, then the question arises what Intel has to hide in that area.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/