linux-kernel - Re: Re-add ibft tree to linux-next please

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:	Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:08:30 -0500
From:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nel.org>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	sfr@...b.auug.org.au, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pjones@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Re-add ibft tree to linux-next please


> The trick is that we also have to retain the code functionality if
> "# CONFIG_ACPI is not set" to scan the memory for the iBFT. That part
> should definitly _not_ be moved to drivers/acpi. It could be moved to
> arch/x86/ .. but it could also stay in drivers/firmware. <shrugs>


Are there really hardware/firmware configurations that support IBFT
and do not support ACPI?

If yes, do they require an OS that has CONFIG_ACPI=n?
Or would finding the table with CONFIG_ACPI=y and acpi_disabled=1
be sufficient?

-Len

--
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/