linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] X86: Revamp reboot behaviour to match Windows more closely

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: <4D015ACF.1050105@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 09 Dec 2010 14:40:15 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
CC:	x86@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] X86: Revamp reboot behaviour to match Windows more
 closely

On 12/09/2010 02:38 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 02:32:52PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 12/09/2010 02:32 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 02:25:05PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>>> When this was discussed before we agreed to use ACPI reboot by default
>>>> with an ACPI cutoff date; this doesn't have any such cutoff.
>>>
>>> Windows doesn't either. Older machines simply won't have the appropriate
>>> flag set in their FADT.
>>>
>>
>> Windows doesn't get validated on old hardware.
>
> XP does this, and older hardware predates the version of the ACPI spec
> that introduced this flag.
>

ACPI is very buggy on early implementations, presumably because WHQL had 
not yet been extended to include it.  That is exactly why we combine 
these kinds of things with a date check.

	-hpa

--
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/