linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] ACPI / button: Add document for ACPI control method lid device restrictions

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: <1468234721.2277.35.camel@hadess.net>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:58:41 +0200
From:	Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>
To:	"Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...il.com>
Cc:	"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>, Lv Zheng <zetalog@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] ACPI / button: Add document for ACPI control
 method lid device restrictions

On Mon, 2016-07-11 at 03:20 +0000, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> 
<snip>
> > This worries me as there is no plan after "During the period the
> > userspace hasn't been switched to use the new event".
> > 
> > I really hope you'll keep sending SW_LID for reliable LID
> > platforms,
> > and not remove it entirely as you will break platforms.
> 
> [Lv Zheng] 
> We won't remove SW_LID from the kernel :).
> 
> And we haven't removed SW_LID from the acpi button driver.
> We'll just stop sending "initial lid state" from acpi button driver,
> i.e., the behavior carried out by "button.lid_init_state=ignore".
> 
> Maybe it is not sufficient, after the userspace has been changed to
> support the new event, we should stop sending SW_LID from acpi button
> driver.

For the affected devices? Sure, but I don't think that's a reasonable
thing to do for "all" the devices. We have a majority of laptops where
this isn't a problem, and it's not even a problem any more on one of
the devices that triggered this discussion (there's a patch for make
the LID status match reality for the Surface 3).