linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] rtc-efi: register rtc-efi device when EFI enabled

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 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, 29 Dec 2012 04:37:29 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	"Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@...il.com>,
	"matt.fleming@...el.com" <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@...e.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rtc-efi: register rtc-efi device when EFI enabled

On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 16:42 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/28/2012 03:39 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 15:32 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> No, that is explicitly the ordering that is excludable.
> > 
> > Windows uses the UEFI time functions. The fact that they fail for us on
> > a bunch of systems is just another symptom of our general failure to
> > accurately mimic Windows when making runtime calls, and we should just
> > make sure that that gets fixed rather than layering more workarounds on
> > top. It's an embarrassment that we're still unable to deal with
> > platforms that work fine with another OS. 
> > 
> 
> Are they using them in preference to ACPI?  This seems a bit odd, since
> one can presume that the ACPI functions were added at Microsoft's request...

In preference to the ACPI RTC, I haven't yet had an ACPI 5.0 TAD device
to test in comparison.