linux-kernel - your patch "x86, olpc: Rework BIOS signature check"

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <4CEFC1AA0200007800024734@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Date:	Fri, 26 Nov 2010 13:18:18 +0000
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com>
To:	<dsd@...top.org>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: your patch "x86, olpc: Rework BIOS signature check"

... adds a select of OLPC_OPENFIRMWARE to the OLPC option,
which contradicts OLPC_OPENFIRMWARE itself depending on
!X86_64 && !X86_PAE. Are the latter dependencies not necessary
anymore (the X86_64 one wasn't very meaningful anyway, since
these options all sit inside a "if X86_32"), or should the select be
conditional?

Also, how meaningful is having OLPC_OPENFIRMWARE on but OLPC
off (i.e. can OLPC_OPENFIRMWARE perhaps go away altogether)?

Thanks, Jan

--
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/