linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] platform/x86: intel-hid: Add support for Device Specific Methods

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, 7 Jul 2018 19:24:44 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Mario Limonciello <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com>
Cc:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Alex Hung <alex.hung@...onical.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform/x86: intel-hid: Add support for Device
 Specific Methods

On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 6:48 AM,  <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com> wrote:
>>I strongly advocate for vendors to have more control over their drivers,
>>but this scenario really frustrates me. I don't think I can justify this
>>to Linus as a fix. But before we just say "no" (because hey, I want
>>these fixes available as early as possible too), let's ask Rafael if he
>>has an opinion or if there is precedent for this in his experience with
>>ACPI drivers in general:
>
> Full disclosure - an updated FW has since been rolled out that reverted this
> behavior back to previous FW behavior due to lack of Linux support for the
> new _DSM.  There is desire to use the new interface (as it did fix actual
> problems with the old one) so at some point it may return.  When that happens
> it would be ideal that people who are (for example) running an LTS kernel
> or distro kernel that tracks stable can pick it up too.

I am all for the better user experience and bugs especially in FW
should be fixed, but I think to support all kind of behaviour the new
FW release should always provide a knob by which we can check if some
feature is supported or not.

Above sounds to me as mistake in design of the fix.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko