linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Intel Management Engine Interface

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:	Tue, 11 Dec 2007 11:02:02 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	andi@...stfloor.org
Cc:	nashif@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel Management Engine Interface

From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 19:53:17 +0100

> Ok but saving oops is such a useful facility that we'll probably
> need to think about implementing SOAP in the kernel.

Ummm, no.

UDP is stateless, a stripped down copy of TCP we simply
do not need.  We also do not need XML in the kernel either.

If they want to support things like this they should do it in the
firmware of the management entity like every other sane server
platform does these days.

The console and OOPS messages should go over an extremely resilient
transport which is as simple as possible which usually means shared
memory or I/O memory with some simple handshake or doorbell.  This
gets it to the management entity board or whatever, and how it gets
from there to the remote system is it's business not that of the
kernel.

Not TCP, and definitely not this XML SOAP crap.
--
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/