linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override.

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]

Message-ID: <47667B62.5080508@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:36:34 +0100
From:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>
To:	"David P. Reed" <dpreed@...d.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Paul Rolland <rol@...917.net>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	rol@...be.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override.

On 17-12-07 14:32, David P. Reed wrote:

> Rene Herman wrote:
>> No, most definitely not. Having the user select udelay or none through 
>> the kernel config and then the kernel deciding "ah, you know what, 
>> I'll know better and use port access anyway" is _utterly_ broken 
>> behaviour. Software needs to listen to its master.
>>
> When acting as an ordinary user, the .config is beyond my control 
> (except on Gentoo).   It is in control of the distro (Fedora, Ubuntu, 
> ... but perhaps not Gentoo).  I think the distro guys want a default 
> behavior that is set in .config, with quirk overrides being done when 
> needed.   And of course the user in his/her boot params gets the final say.

Yes, and when the user/distributor specifically selected udelay or none as 
an I/O delay method it makes no sense whatsoever to have the kernel override 
that again -- the DMI hack only fixes something for the default case, when 
_no_ specific choice had been made (which the current setup can't express 
but mine did).

I feel particularly strongly (always) about that "listen to its master" bit. 
The kernel does not know better then whomever configured it, even when it does.

Rene.


--
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/