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, 04 Aug 2007 10:50:02 +0200
From:	Javier Pello <javier.pello@...c.es>
To:	david@...g.hm
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] request_firmware: skip timeout if userspace was not 
	notified

> I've been told that it's possible to have the kernel pull the firmware
> off of an initrd (or was it initramfs, I keep confusing the two) without
> having any userspace, just put the right file in the right place
> (unfortunantly I've never gotten around to testing this) will this patch
> break this feature?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the way this works is having
the initramfs become an "early userspace", a filesystem that is mounted,
well, earlier during boot, so that it is available before drivers begin
to initialise (earlier: as a rootfs_initcall, as opposed to at the end of
the boot process), but that in all respects behaves as a fully-fledged root
filesystem. In particular, firmware should be requested from userspace in
the standard way, and the patch should not break anything. I would test
this to be sure, but I have absolutely no experience preparing an initramfs.

Javier


-
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ