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

Message-ID: <CAEEQ3wnXJVBLdqW6GRFuCKuBtr38uKHz7E2+P8TAv1_+b6kBKA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 16:05:04 +0800
From:   运辉崔 <cuiyunhui@...edance.com>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc:     ron minnich <rminnich@...il.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        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,
        lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        葛士建 <geshijian@...edance.com>,
        韦东 <weidong.wd@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] firmware: added a firmware information
 passing method FFI

Hi Ard,

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 2:43 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:

> I think all of this belongs under arch/riscv

Could you look at the content of the patch again? As we discussed
before, we need to connect to the ACPI and the SMBIOS entry
At least this part of the code has to be placed in the corresponding place:
drivers/acpi/osl.c: acpi_os_get_root_pointer()
drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c:dmi_scan_machine()

Because obtaining firmware information through DTS belongs to the
content of the driver firmware, it is appropriate to put this piece of
code in drivers/firmware/ffi.c.

So I insist on the current revision, what do you think?

Thanks,
Yunhui