linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: default to reboot via ACPI

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: <48B40631.5090007@qumranet.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:33:37 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
To:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
CC:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: default to reboot via ACPI

Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>   
>> Most machines are recent machines.
>>     
>
>  This is a bold statement I would say.  Any numbers to back it up?
>
>   

Only common sense.  Non-recent machines are barely usable these days.  
Sure they work well as a firewall or server-in-a-closet, but if you run 
a desktop or a server that actually does useful work, you're running a 
relatively recent machine.

>> If a machine has acpi, and the reset register is wired to the launch 
>> controller, then perhaps this change is unsafe.  Don't issue sysrq-b on 
>> such machines.
>>     
>
>  If a machine has ACPI and it is broken randomly, then the results can be
> arbitrary.  Hopefully not destructively.  If even such a simple thing as
> wiring the reset line so that it functions correctly can be got wrong,
> more so can be more complex matters.
>   

If we find that the reset was wired to the launch controller after all, 
we can back out the change (after we re-evolve technology and Linux; 
after all we are doomed to keep reinventing it, aren't we?).

>  Failing a better alternative, I suppose the change has to go in though.
>   

Let's see what breaks, if any.  I understand the disgust people feel 
when ACPI is mentioned, but we can't ignore reality.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/