linux-kernel - Re: [LKML] Re: [PATCH 1/2] ibft: Update iBFT handling for v1.03 of the spec.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 12 May 2010 09:58:43 -0400
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gpxe-devel@...erboot.org,
	Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [LKML] Re: [PATCH 1/2] ibft: Update iBFT handling for v1.03 of
	the spec.

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 01:26:59AM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> 
> >  #define IBFT_SIGN "iBFT"
> ...
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > +	/*
> > +	 * One spec says "IBFT", the other says "iBFT". We have to check
> > +	 * for both.
> > +	 */
> 
> Really?
> Which one do you see in the field?

The one machine I do remember seeing this in the ACPI tables was the IBM
HS20, but I can't remember which one it was. Mike, Peter - any
recollection? Don't know about about Intel ones.

For cases where there was no ACPI, the 'iBFT' was definitly the string I saw.

> any reason to #define "iBFT" above and not use it below?
> 
> > +	if (!ibft_addr)
> > +		acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_IBFT, acpi_find_ibft);
> > +	if (!ibft_addr)
> > +		acpi_table_parse("iBFT", acpi_find_ibft);

Could definitly use the IBFT_SIGN here.

Thanks for taking a look!
--
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/