linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Remove led/gpio setup from pcengines platform driver

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: <9fb836bc-7d8a-b6e2-8d73-8e74a8f2e38b@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:48:41 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>,
        Ed W <lists@...dgooses.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     fe@....tdt.de, "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Remove led/gpio setup from pcengines platform
 driver

Hi Enrico and Ed W,

Quick self intro: I have take over drivers/platform/x86
maintainership from Andy; and I'm working my way through
the backlog of old patches in patchwork:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/platform-driver-x86/list/

On 10/12/20 9:39 PM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 22.09.20 00:17, Ed W wrote:
>> Hi, I've been adding support for the PC Engines APU5 board, which is a variant of the APU 2-4 boards
>> with some nice features. The current platform driver for pcengines boards has some redundant
>> features with regards to recent bios/firmware packages for the board as they now set the ACPI tables
>> to indicate GPIOs for keys and leds.
> 
> NAK. Breaks existing userlands in the field (literally field), forcing
> users to fw upgrade is not an option (field roll would be realy expensive).

Thank you Enrico, I was wondering the same (what about userspace breakage)
when I was looking at this patch. It is good to have confirmation that
userspace breakage is a real issue here.

And I completely agree with Enrico, we cannot go and break userspace,
so some other solution will need to be found here.

I'm marking this series as changes requested in patchwork, please submit
a new version which does not break existing userspace.

Regards,

Hans