linux-kernel - Re: Check for BIOS bugs - Original Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/70] ACPICA: Workaround for reversed

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: <20080708221110.GC18195@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jul 2008 00:11:10 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To:	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	"Lin, Ming M" <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
	Huang Cheng <cheng.huang@...el.com>,
	firmwarekit-discuss@...host.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Check for BIOS bugs - Original Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/70]
	ACPICA: Workaround for reversed _PRT entries from BIOS

Hi!

> >>> FIRMWARE_BUG_ON(severity, description, component);
> >> 
> >> Yes, please.
> 
> I'm not excited about maintaining
> maintaining linux-as-a-firmware-diagnostic --
> particularly when...
> 
> 1. it clutters the code for normail machines
> 2. finding the bug is pointless, because even
>    if you fix one machine, you are guaranteed to
>    not fix all machines and thus must maintain
>    the workaround anyway.

Well, at least we can make sure new machines are okay.

Plus, it is nice to know how common hw/BIOS problems are.

> >> I'd also like HARDWARE_BUG_ON(), with similar usage.
> >> 
> >> With all the preload-linux-on-foo project, we have some 
> >> chance to make
> >> BIOS vendors fix their stuff if we can easily diagnose errors in
> >> there.
> 
> These customers should be running 
> http://linuxfirmwarekit.org/
> 
> We do maintain some degree of "high-road ACPI spec checking"
> with the "acpi=strict" boot option.  If we do more of this,
> I think it should stay under that option.

That's okay with me, but it would be nice to have printk() markup, so
that we can tell BIOS/hw bugs from normal kernel messages.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/