linux-kernel - Re: e100: checksum mismatch on 82551ER rev10

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:	Fri, 04 Aug 2006 04:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	molle.bestefich@...il.com
Cc:	auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com, charlieb@...ge.apana.org.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: e100: checksum mismatch on 82551ER rev10

From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 04:20:24 -0700 (PDT)

> I totally agree, Intel driver maintainers generally act like complete
> idiots in these kinds of situations.
> 
> If the EEPROM has a broken checksum, the user should have an option
> that allows him to try and use the device anyways, end of story.

And BTW I want to remind the entire world that the last time Intel
cried wolf to all of us about vendors using broken EEPROMs with their
networking chips it turned out to be a bug in one of the patches Intel
put into the Linux driver. :-)

Intel should really humble themselves and help users instead of hinder
them.  Putting the blame on other vendors does not help users, I don't
care how you spin it.  It only serves to make Intel look like a bunch
of control freaks, and that pisses off users to no end.

Please put the option into the e100 driver to allow trying to use the
device even if the EEPROM checksum is wrong.

If an Intel developer doesn't do it, I will.
-
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/