linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: soc-core: Prevent warning if no DMI table is present

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]

Date:   Wed, 3 Mar 2021 11:50:56 +0000
From:   Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: soc-core: Prevent warning if no DMI table is
 present


On 02/03/2021 17:23, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Mar 2021 13:49:13 +0100,
> Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 09:27:12AM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>> Many systems do not provide a DMI table and on these systems a warning,
>>> such as the following, is printed on boot ...
>>>
>>>  WARNING KERN tegra-audio-graph-card sound: ASoC: no DMI vendor name!
>>>
>>> If DMI support is enabled in the kernel, there is no simple way to
>>> detect if a DMI table is table or not. Note that the variable
>>> 'dmi_available' is not exported and so cannot be used by kernel modules.
>>
>> We could fix that, or provide an accessor function?  Or only warn if
>> we're on an ACPI system (which we can check from a module).  This really
>> does feel like something we should be warning about on systems that are
>> supposed to have DMI information available as standard.
> 
> I had the same feeling when I took a look at the patch, but later
> changed mind, since the error will pop up also if a system has an
> unmatured BIOS with some bogus vendor DMI string, too.  That is, users
> of such a machine gets always an error message although this isn't any
> serious problem unless you need a dedicated UCM profile (which can't
> be used on such a system in anyway).
> 
> So, I agree that exporting dmi_avilable could improve the situation a
> bit, but the error level needs still reconsideration.


Thanks for the feedback. Yes it is probably better if we have a specific
test. I will send out a V2 for review.

Thanks
Jon

-- 
nvpublic