linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] PCI / ACPI: Identify external PCI devices

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: <20181115102239.GU2500@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Nov 2018 12:22:39 +0200
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc:     Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
        Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
        Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
        Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
        Christian Kellner <ckellner@...hat.com>,
        Mario.Limonciello@...l.com,
        Anthony Wong <anthony.wong@...onical.com>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] PCI / ACPI: Identify external PCI devices

On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 11:45:36AM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 01:27:00PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > To be frank the concept (and Microsoft _DSD bindings) seems a bit vague
> > > and not thoroughly defined and I would question its detection at
> > > PCI/ACPI core level, I would hope this can be clarified at ACPI
> > > specification level, at least.
> > 
> > I guess that is the way they envision to use _DSD. Instead of having
> > single UUID that covers all properties (like what we have with device
> > properties) they have one UUID per property "class". I certainly hope we
> > don't need to keep extending prp_guids[] array each time they invent
> > another "class" of properties.
> 
> It is even worse than that. This is a unilateral/obscure change that
> won't be part of ACPI specifications (I guess it was easier to add a
> UUID than add this to the ACPI specifications through the AWSG) but it
> is still supposed to be applicable to ACPI PCI bindings on any
> platforms/arches; this way of adding bindings does not work and it
> has to be rectified.

I agree.

For the existing property "classes" such as the one here I don't think
we can do anything. There are systems already with these included in
their ACPI tables.

I wonder if you have any objections regarding this patch?