linux-kernel - Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH 0/5]PCI: x86 MMCONFIG]

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: <20071224082854.GB15161@colo.lackof.org>
Date:	Mon, 24 Dec 2007 01:28:54 -0700
From:	Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	Tony Camuso <tcamuso@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH 0/5]PCI: x86 MMCONFIG]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 02:40:06PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> Sure, I realize this, but it solves the problem in one way for broken
> hardware, such that it at least allows it to work, right?  It also
> provides a better incentive for the manufacturer to fix their bios,
> which as you are on-site at HP, it would seem odd that they would just
> not do that instead of trying to work around this in the kernel...

Greg, you know why: Cost.

Asking the BIOS provider to roll a new version costs.
Rolling the BIOS version might also require re-running the OS "Certification".
Besides the cost of an OS re-cert, BIOS changes are unlikely to happen if
it will delay the introduction and/or sale of new products.

And it's not considered to be a "BIOS" problem unless win XP (or maybe
"Vista" these days) fails the same way (which BIOS supplier would have
fixed...).

hth,
grant
--
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/