linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Implement overriding of arbitrary ACPI tables via initrd

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:	Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:44:59 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, eric.piel@...mplin-utc.net,
	vojcek@...n.pl, dsdt@...gusch.at, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>, lenb@...nel.org,
	robert.moore@...el.com, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Harald Hoyer <harald@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Implement overriding of arbitrary ACPI tables via initrd

You're missing the point.  Unless you have specific rules how to deal.with extensions, and what thise extensions may do, you're not adding anything.

I think the simpler just use cpio idea still wins out in my mind.

Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:

>On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:15:59PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 03/24/2012 11:42 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> > 
>> > Probably should also have:
>> > 		u32 version;
>> > 
>> > in case we decide to expand this structure in the future, and:
>> >> 		u32 type;	/* 1 = file data, 2 = ACPI, 3 = microcode... */
>> >> 		u32 length;	/* Length of data object */
>> >> 	};
>> > 
>> > and encapsulate the whole thing in a 4K union?
>> > 
>> 
>> For "version" you'd have to define what happens if you see a version
>> number you don't recognize, and why that is in any way better than
>> changing the magic number or the type.  It is something that people
>like
>> to throw in without thinking about it, and that is a mistake.
>
>I was thinking of interface version. So the first would be 1, and if
>there are extensions (so version 2 for example), it should support 1
>and 2.
>The idea is to expand past the structure with newer additions without
>breaking the binary interface.
>
>> 
>> Forcing everything to be page-aligned may be a good idea, although
>that
>> assumes all bootloaders actually align them that way...
>
>Oh, and be 4K.
>> 
>> > 
>> > Perhaps the header should be in big-endian (that is the same as the
>network
>> > byte order, right?) and each sub-type can define its own endian?
>> > 
>> 
>> The content of the encapsulation is its own thing; it will be
>different
>> for different types as most of them already
>> 
>> 	-hpa
>> 
>> -- 
>> H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>> I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse my brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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/