linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: base support for the TS-5500 platform

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: <4E55670F.90102@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:03:11 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
CC:	x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: base support for the TS-5500 platform

On 08/24/2011 01:23 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> +
> +/**
> + * ts5500_pre_detect() - check for TS-5500 specific features
> + *
> + * It is not safe to read ID register if we are not sure that it's a TS SBC.
> + * Since TS SBCs don't have DMI support, it is safer to check for a TS-5500
> + * specific feature such as the processor.
> + */
> +static int ts5500_pre_detect(void)
> +{
> +	/* Check for AMD ElanSC520 Microcontroller */
> +	if (!(cpu_info.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD &&
> +	      cpu_info.x86 == AMD_ELAN_FAMILY &&
> +	      cpu_info.x86_model == AMD_ELAN_SC520))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +

Doesn't this mean you will read this unsafe register on any Elan SC520
platform?  Is that okay?

	-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/