linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add acpi_pptt_get_package

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: <bc7486c6-4081-a9eb-c50c-c91f2c3d26c2@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 31 Jan 2020 10:58:34 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
CC:     <rjw@...ysocki.net>, <lenb@...nel.org>, <jeremy.linton@....com>,
        <arnd@...db.de>, <olof@...om.net>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
        <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add acpi_pptt_get_package_info() API

On 30/01/2020 17:41, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 04:12:20PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>> On 30/01/2020 11:23, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>> I personally would not prefer to add the support when I know it is getting
>>>> deprecated. I am not sure on kernel community policy on the same.
>>>>
>>> OK, the details on the proposal to deprecate can be now found in UEFI
>>> bugzilla [1]
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it be a better approach to propose deprecating the field when there
>> is a readily available alternative, i.e. not a spec from a different body in
>> beta stage?
>>
> 
> Understandable and valid concerns. It would be helpful if you raise it in
> the UEFI bugzilla. Your concerns will get lost if you just raise here.

ok, thanks. I can do that if and when I can get an account...

> 
>> To me, this new SMC support will take an appreciable amount of time to be
>> implemented in FW by SiPs when actually released. And if it requires an ATF
>> upgrade - which I guess it does - then that's a big job.
>>
> 
> Again I do understand, please raise it with the SMCCC specification contact
> as listed in the link I shared.
> 

I will talk with my FW guys first when they return from CNY.

Cheers,
john