linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] firmware: added a firmware information passing method FFI

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAEEQ3w=wBdpZWnUd2WWVBC3BtFiUp-PQtNAtdXE4cO4n0XT-fg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Jun 2023 16:04:15 +0800
From:   运辉崔 <cuiyunhui@...edance.com>
To:     ron minnich <rminnich@...il.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, rafael@...nel.org,
        lenb@...nel.org, jdelvare@...e.com, yc.hung@...iatek.com,
        angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com,
        allen-kh.cheng@...iatek.com, pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com,
        tinghan.shen@...iatek.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, geshijian@...edance.com,
        weidong.wd@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] firmware: added a firmware information
 passing method FFI

Thanks for Ron's suggestions.

Hi Ard,  Mark,
>
> Is there some feeling here that it would be ok to restrict this discussion to risc-v, and not bring in ARM considerations.  WDYT?
>

Hi Ard,  Mark,

Now the coreboot we are using does not support EFI and only supports
one interface DTB. It seems that we have to pass the firmware
information through DTB.

>From another point of view, ACPI and SMBIOS are common modules of the
kernel, not only EFI, but also other interfaces can also be connected
to this module, such as 0xF0000 for SMBIOS,
CONFIG_ACPI_LEGACY_TABLES_LOOKUP for ACPI,  this patch is also.

We just use the DTB channel to add a few nodes to complete the
transfer of firmware information, which does not interfere with DTS
itself.

We think it is unnecessary to add an ACPI-supporting framework under
the fdt framework we discussed before. We only need one set of ACPI
framework, but one more set will cause unnecessary trouble.

So, let's move on to this patch, shall we?

Thanks,
Yunhui