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: <2ba7fc12-a3a7-2783-54e6-27e9eb60ec9c@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Oct 2020 20:37:16 +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,

On 10/19/20 5:44 PM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 14.10.20 10:41, Hans de Goede wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> Keep the current LED/gpio setup code, but make executing it conditional
>> on the BIOS version and skip the LED/gpio setup when the new BIOS is
>> present to avoid having duplicate LED entries, etc. in that case.
>>
>> I guess this would still break userspace because if I understand things
>> correctly the new ACPI based setup uses different LED names ? That
>> seems unfortunate, but I guess that from the kernel pov we can just
>> blame the BIOS for this, and since we definitely do not want duplicate
>> LED entries for the same LED, this seems the least bad choice.
> 
> Sorry, but not fine. When a newer box is taken from storage into
> production (eg. replacement or new installation), application breaks.
> LED isn't the only problem, also affects buttons.
> 
> The whole reaons why I invested all the time for writing general
> purpose drivers (fch-gpio is separate from board driver) and bringing
> it to mainline was having clean and generic support for these boards,
> instead of having to carry around special patch queues forever and
> in near future just using stock distro kernel. I guess that's the
> main reason for very most mainlined drivers.

Ack and that is how things should be done.

> This will be defeated
> as soon as the whole thing becomes board/bios specific again.

I hear you, but if newer BIOS versions all of a sudden start
declaring their own stuff, then we need to come up with some
solution here...

Not sure what that solution should be though.

Regards,

Hans

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ