linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] firmware: allow firmware files to be built into kernel image

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: <s5h4p8pujy3.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Date:	Fri, 23 May 2008 17:19:32 +0200
From:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aoliva@...hat.com,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Abhay Salunke <Abhay_Salunke@...l.com>,
	kay.sievers@...y.org, Haroldo Gamal <gamal@...ernex.com.br>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] firmware: allow firmware files to be built into	kernel	image

At Fri, 23 May 2008 15:58:31 +0100,
David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 16:53 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > This looks like a nice cleanup.  It'd be nicer if we can skip vmalloc
> > and duplication of the image for static binaries.
> 
> Yeah, I thought about that. I was slightly concerned that drivers might
> actually try to _modify_ the firmware they loaded, though. As it is,
> there's no fundamental reason why they shouldn't do that.

Hm, but request_firmware() returns the const pointer.  It implies that
the caller shouldn't change the content, doesn't it?

I cannot guarantee that there must be no misbehaving drivers,
though...


thanks,

Takashi
--
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/