linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/14] dell-laptop: extract SMBIOS-related code to a separate module

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: <20160121133921.GA4626@eudyptula.hq.kempniu.pl>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:39:21 +0100
From:	Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl>
To:	Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
Cc:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>,
	Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@...sung.com>,
	Alex Hung <alex.hung@...onical.com>,
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] dell-laptop: extract SMBIOS-related code to a
 separate module

> Another idea:
> 
> What about passing struct calling_interface_buffer from caller allocated
> memory (either from stack or kernel alloc) to dell-smbios which will
> copy it into own buffer under 4GB and then pass it to dcdbas?
> 
> This will avoid to use that get/release function and there will be only
> one send_request.

Well, yes, these two functions could then be ripped out, but the callers
would have to do the error checking on their own.  Of course that's not
a bad thing per se, but it changes the currently used concept.

> But I will let decision for API to other people as I do not know what
> the best API to use here...

In order to avoid delaying this any further, I'll post a v2 soon and
hopefully it'll be good enough for your Acked-by.  If it turns out more
people have misgivings about it, I'll adjust the code.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Kępień