linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, reboot: skip DMI checks if reboot set by user

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:41:08 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Michael D Labriola <mlabriol@...b.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Kushal Koolwal <kushalkoolwal@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, michael.d.labriola@...il.com,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, support@...salogic.com,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, reboot: skip DMI checks if reboot set by user


* Michael D Labriola <mlabriol@...b.com> wrote:

> > Yes, and such a patch would be appreciated.
> > 
> > The reason it is as it is dates back to before the 32-64 bit 
> > unification, as far as I know.
> > 
> > (BIOS reboot is currently not supported on 64 bits, mainly.)
> 
> Well, that does complicate it a bit.  I'll gin something up 
> and see what you think.  I guess it will involve having an
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 block inside a single dmi_table structure
> for the BIOS quirks.

Btw., i'd suggest to keep the two changes in separate patches, 
so that if any causes problems we can bisect to it separately. 
The more patches you can reasonably split it up into, the 
better.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/