linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] DMI: allow omitting ident strings in DMI tables

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]

Date:	Thu, 3 Dec 2009 10:25:42 +0100
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DMI: allow omitting ident strings in DMI tables

On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 00:56:30 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 09:30:09AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 19:12:40 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c b/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
> > > index 938100f..9116aa7 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
> > > @@ -440,6 +440,15 @@ static bool dmi_matches(const struct dmi_system_id *dmi)
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  /**
> > > + *	dmi_is_end_of_table - check for end-of-table marker
> > > + *	@dmi: pointer to the dmi_system_id structure to check
> > > + */
> > > +static bool dmi_is_end_of_table(const struct dmi_system_id *dmi)
> > > +{
> > > +	return dmi->ident == NULL && dmi->matches[0].slot == DMI_NONE;
> > 
> > If you really want to allow for dmi->ident == NULL, then I guess you can
> > _only_ check for dmi->matches[0].slot == DMI_NONE. I can't think of any
> > legitimate use of DMI_NONE for a used slot.
> 
> Current behavior is that entry with ident and empty match table matches
> everything. If we only check on the first slot then it will not match. I
> wanted to preserve the current behavior.

Is there a use case for this behavior? If not then I don't see the
point of preserving it.

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
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/