linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/2] ACPICA: Tables: Add function to remove ACPI tables

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]

Message-ID: <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E883BB4D5B8@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Feb 2016 03:19:10 +0000
From:	"Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
CC:	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	"Borislav Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] ACPICA: Tables: Add function to remove ACPI tables

Hi,

> From: Matt Fleming [mailto:matt@...eblueprint.co.uk]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ACPICA: Tables: Add function to remove ACPI tables
> 
> On Thu, 18 Feb, at 09:15:28PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Actually, the reason is that, as a rule, the process for ACPICA
> > patches is that they first go to upstream ACPICA and they are acquired
> > by Linux from there.
> >
> > While there are some exceptions from that process, there also are good
> > reasons for that process to be followed, including the licensing one
> > mentioned by Lv.
> >
> > All that said, Matt, if you agree that the patch can be applied under
> > the BSD license, I think we can offer help with converting it to the
> > upstream ACPICA coding conventions and applying it there.  Lv, would
> > you be able to take care of that?
> 
> I don't have any problem with that, but can we hold off on this patch
> for now? There's another approach to fixing the BGRT issue with kexec
> that's being discussed which would supersede this,
> 
>   https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160218141544.GH2651@codeblueprint.co.uk
> 
> Assuming this patch does get picked up again, I'm happy to respin it
> against upstream ACPICA, but how do I go about getting dependent
> patches merged, PATCH 2/2 in this case?
[Lv Zheng] 
I can help to port your code to the ACPICA upstream.
Rafael can help to merge the linuxized ported patch and the PATCH 2/2 if you want this solution to be upstreamed now.
Or you can wait and submit PATCH 2/2 again.
PATCH 1/2 should be a part of ACPICA 201603xx release I think.

Thanks and best regards
-Lv