linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI / x86: Work around broken XSDT on Advantech DAC-BJ01 board

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]

Message-ID: <535336dc-8c54-7c3a-ecf6-b2920ea99297@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Mar 2022 18:56:26 +0100
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Mark Cilissen <mark@...suba.nl>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI / x86: Work around broken XSDT on Advantech
 DAC-BJ01 board

Hi,

On 3/3/22 14:42, Mark Cilissen wrote:
> 
>> On 3 Mar 4 Reiwa, at 14:38, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Mark,
> 
> Hi Hans,
> 
>> On 3/2/22 21:20, Mark Cilissen wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> I think that there are a lot more boards that will have
>> DMI_BIOS_VENDOR == "Phoenix Technologies LTD"
>> then that there are boards that will have
>> DMI_PRODUCT_NAME == "Bearlake CRB Board"
>>
>> So if you want to make the DMI match as specific as possible then
>> IMHO dropping the bios-vendor match is best.
> 
> Of course, but just to clarify -- my proposal above is to drop
> 
>> DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "NEC”),
> 
> not
> 
>> DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Bearlake CRB Board”),
> 
> . :-)

Ah I see, I did indeed misunderstand that. Still NEC is not that
often seen as sys-vendor, so I still believe dropping the bios-vendor
match is best.

Regards,

Hans