linux-kernel - Re: SPCR and default serial port

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: <2e2fe044-251d-eca9-3692-8f3182db3905@jonmasters.org>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 23:29:41 -0400
From:   Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>
To:     "Herrenschmidt, Benjamin" <benh@...zon.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: SPCR and default serial port

On 4/15/20 2:04 AM, Herrenschmidt, Benjamin wrote:
> Hi !
> 
> Today, arm64 allows the serial port specified in ACPI SPCR table to be
> selected as a default console, but x86 doesn't (second argument to
> acpi_parse_spcr).
> 
> I understand while we might have been worried of breaking existing
> setups back then but should we re-think this, maybe via a CONFIG option
> ?
> 
> It makes a lot of sense to have firmware tell us which of the
> potentially many serial port in a system is our active console, along
> with its configuration...
> 
> This also shouldn't cause problem on systems that already specify a
> console explicitly on the command line.
> 
> Any opinion ?

I think it would be /great/ if x86 followed Arm. A config option would 
allow it to be easily ignored by those who don't want it, but you'll 
want to get data from e.g. distros on how many systems have weird BIOSes 
that provide a non-useful table today.

Jon.

-- 
Computer Architect