linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] platform/x86: think-lmi: Enable opcode support on BIOS settings

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0e11913-ba27-e3a-fafe-bd5e48db8b6b@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 May 2023 14:51:46 +0300 (EEST)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>
cc:     hdegoede@...hat.com, markgross@...nel.org,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] platform/x86: think-lmi: Enable opcode support
 on BIOS settings

On Fri, 26 May 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:

> Whilst reviewing some documentation from the FW team on using WMI on
> Lenovo system I noticed that we weren't using Opcode support when
> changing BIOS settings in the thinkLMI driver.
> 
> We should be doing this to ensure we're future proof as the old
> non-opcode mechanism has been deprecated.
> 
> Tested on X1 Carbon G10 and G11.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>
> ---
> Changes in v2: Update comment for clearer explanation of what the driver
> is doing
> Changes in v3: None. Version bump with rest of series
> 
>  drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
> index 1138f770149d..2745224f62ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
> @@ -1001,7 +1001,33 @@ static ssize_t current_value_store(struct kobject *kobj,
>  				tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->save_signature);
>  		if (ret)
>  			goto out;
> -	} else { /* Non certiifcate based authentication */
> +	} else if (tlmi_priv.opcode_support) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If opcode support is present use that interface.
> +		 * Note - this sets the variable and then the password as separate
> +		 * WMI calls. Function tlmi_save_bios_settings will error if the
> +		 * password is incorrect.
> +		 */
> +		set_str = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s,%s;", setting->display_name,
> +					new_setting);

Alignment.

> +		if (!set_str) {
> +			ret = -ENOMEM;
> +			goto out;
> +		}
> +
> +		ret = tlmi_simple_call(LENOVO_SET_BIOS_SETTINGS_GUID, set_str);
> +		if (ret)
> +			goto out;
> +
> +		if (tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->valid && tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->password[0]) {
> +			ret = tlmi_opcode_setting("WmiOpcodePasswordAdmin",
> +					tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->password);

Align.

> +			if (ret)
> +				goto out;
> +		}
> +
> +		ret = tlmi_save_bios_settings("");
> +	} else { /* old non opcode based authentication method (deprecated)*/

non missing hyphen.

Missing space at the comment closing.

>  		if (tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->valid && tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->password[0]) {
>  			auth_str = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s,%s,%s;",
>  					tlmi_priv.pwd_admin->password,
> 

Except for those style issues, it look okay to me:

Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>


-- 
 i.