linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] firmware: add SmPL report for custom fallback mechanism

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:   Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:49:40 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     ming.lei@...onical.com, daniel.wagner@...-carit.de, teg@...m.no,
        mchehab@....samsung.com, zajec5@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, markivx@...eaurora.org,
        stephen.boyd@...aro.org, broonie@...nel.org,
        zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tiwai@...e.de, johannes@...solutions.net,
        chunkeey@...glemail.com, hauke@...ke-m.de,
        jwboyer@...oraproject.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
        dwmw2@...radead.org, jslaby@...e.com,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...capital.net,
        fengguang.wu@...el.com, rpurdie@...ys.net,
        j.anaszewski@...sung.com, Abhay_Salunke@...l.com,
        Julia.Lawall@...6.fr, Gilles.Muller@...6.fr, nicolas.palix@...g.fr,
        dhowells@...hat.com, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
        linux-leds@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] firmware: add SmPL report for custom fallback
 mechanism

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 03:02:22PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:32:26AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 03:10:37AM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > Even though most distributions today disable the fallback mechanism
> > > by default we've determined that we cannot remove them from the kernel.
> > > This is not well understood so document the reason and logic behind that.
> > 
> > Well, the biggest reason is that some distros still rely on this.  I've
> > seen new products being made that rely on it,
> 
> Let's be a bit more precise: upstream there are only two driver relying on this
> and I've learned about the non-upstream uses which folks have been calling for
> ensuring this functionality is kept for: a) non-upstream mobile 802.11 drivers or
> upstream 802.11 drivers with slight out-of-tree customizations with a requirements to
> get calibration data using custom mechanisms b) remote-proc users with huge firmware
> requirements for which initramfs is not well suited for.

That b) is a lot of devices, I know of a few million phones in the wild
right now that rely on it.  And millions is a pretty big number :)

Anyway, thanks for addressing my concerns, I'm guessing you will respin
these remaining patches and resend them as I think there were still some
comments on them?  I took the first 3 here.

Is the "drvdata" code ready in your opinion to be merged / reviewed yet?

thanks,

greg k-h