linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] iio: bme680

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: <CAHp75VdHMm+WYA2Nfiz1g3B5Sj14Rq601aSyQ_puynudg9ZiZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 May 2021 17:31:01 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: bme680_i2c: Remove ACPI support

On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 4:50 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 03:42:08PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > On 5/6/21 3:37 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:

...

> > We (mostly Andy and me) are not even 100% sure this one is
> > a fake ACPI ID, but we do pretty strongly believe that it is.
> >
>
> What a mess :-(

What we can do is a checkpatch-alike check for vendor ID to be
registered in [1] and issue a warning if not. At least it alerts
maintainers. Joe, do you think it is doable or we should have a
separate tool for that? (Because I have no clue how checkpatch
cohabits with internet connection, otherwise the problem with
synchronisation of that registry might be a problem)

[1]: https://uefi.org/PNP_ACPI_Registry


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko