[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200717062841.GA3238569@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 08:28:41 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Daniel Gutson <daniel.gutson@...ypsium.com>
Cc: Derek Kiernan <derek.kiernan@...inx.com>,
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Richard Hughes <hughsient@...il.com>,
Alex Bazhaniuk <alex@...ypsium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PATCH] Firmware security information in SYSFS
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 07:36:27PM -0300, Daniel Gutson wrote:
> +What: /sys/kernel/firmware-security/bioswe
Ick, I stopped reading right here.
No, this is not where this belongs.
We already have /sys/firmware/, right? And firmware-specific
subdirectories below that.
We also have /sys/devices/system/ and I think that would be a much
better place for this, as it is easier to work with a real 'struct
device' than a "raw" kobject any day. Bonus is you get full support of
userspace libraries when you do that, unlike when dealing with kobjects.
Also, this really is a _SPECIFIC_ type of firmware that supports these
features, right? Why not call that out too? This is not generic by any
means.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists