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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:23:23 +0000
From:   <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com>
To:     <pali.rohar@...il.com>
CC:     <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Subject: Dell SMBIOS initializing before backends are ready

After Paul's recent message regarding the odd wifi issue he had a 
comment I wanted to investigate:

dell_smbios: "No dell-smbios drivers are loaded"

Coming up early in boot.  This is a side effect of dell-smbios having two
backend drivers that can be compiled as modules but no tie to force
them to initialize before calls to dell_smbios_call.

So I believe what is happening is dell_micmute_led_set is called from
the HDA driver and calls dell_smbios_call early too.

I haven't tried it on a platform with mic mute, but I suspect it might cause
the mic mute LED status to be wrong initially (but corrected later when 
toggled).

Ideas that came to mind:

1) In dell_smbios_call if no backends loaded, explicitly do a symbol_request
for both backends and run initialization at that time.

If that works, that would also resolve if someone manually unloaded both
backends but a kernel module still tried to perform a request.

2) Add a notifier chain for when the driver is ready (a backend is loaded)
to all consumers of dell_smbios_call.  Don't let other modules call
dell_smbios_call until notified.
Don't let the HDA driver call dell_micmute_led_set either.

3) try_module_get during dell-smbios initialization for both the backends

What's the correct way to address this?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ