linux-kernel - Re: [Bug 11603] Re: ACPI PnP on Intel MU440EX

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200809251353.55554.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Date:	Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:53:55 -0600
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
To:	matthieu castet <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>
Cc:	Martin Doucha <next_ghost@...ck.cz>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug 11603] Re: ACPI PnP on Intel MU440EX

> Aren't parport still probing it's own port if pnp failed ?

Could be; I haven't looked.  I just assumed parport didn't do the
legacy probe because Martin reported that the port didn't work when
PNPACPI was enabled.

And I retract my "parport.nopnp" idea.  A positive statement like
"parport.legacy" or something along the lines of "look here" would
be better.  It's safe to use PNP to probe; it just won't find anything.
All we want is something to tell parport to do the legacy probe in
addition.

--
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/