linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ipmi:pci: Blacklist a Realtek "IPMI" device

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: <7630b31f-0b6a-6725-aac0-3c06c142d557@acm.org>
Date:   Tue, 13 Mar 2018 06:59:11 -0500
From:   Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>
To:     Daniel Drake <drake@...lessm.com>
Cc:     Chris Chiu <chiu@...lessm.com>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Upstreaming Team <linux@...lessm.com>,
        openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipmi:pci: Blacklist a Realtek "IPMI" device

On 03/13/2018 02:27 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:50 AM,  <minyard@....org> wrote:
>> From: Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>
>>
>> Realtek has some sort of "Virtual" IPMI device on the PCI bus as a
>> KCS controller, but whatever it is, it's not one.  Ignore it if seen.
>>
>> Reported-by: Chris Chiu <chiu@...lessm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>
>> ---
>>
>> I haven't heard anything from you on this.  Here is a patch that should
>> blacklist that device, though I don't have a way to easily test it.
>> If you would prefer this, could you test it?
> Sorry for the slow response, and thanks for the patch!
>
> We have tested it here and it seems to be working fine now - the IPMI
> stuff no longer initializes system interfaces, and hence doesn't get
> in the way when going into suspend or reboot later.

Ok, thanks, I will add it with a "Tested-by" from you, if that is ok.

-corey

>
> This is a consumer desktop platform, so if some kind of IPMI
> functionality is really present in the hardware then it is not really
> going to be relevant for the ordinary user. So it should be fine to
> just ignore the hardware as you have done.
>
> Thanks
> Daniel