linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] mtd: spi-nor: core: add manufacturer flags

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: <8734lmhcil.fsf@geanix.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 13:37:06 +0200
From: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
To: Erez <erezgeva2@...il.com>
Cc: Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>,  Tudor Ambarus
 <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,  Erez Geva <erezgeva@...ime.org>,
  linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,  Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
  Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,  Vignesh Raghavendra
 <vigneshr@...com>,  devicetree@...r.kernel.org,  Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>,  Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,  Conor
 Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] mtd: spi-nor: core: add manufacturer flags

Erez <erezgeva2@...il.com> writes:

> On Thu, 26 Sept 2024 at 09:46, Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com> wrote:
>>
>> Erez <erezgeva2@...il.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 18:19, Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > > > I would gladly remove the obsolete mx25l12805d.
>> >> > > Why? I don't see any need for that.
>> >> > Maybe because we do not want compatibility table?
>> >>
>> >> I don't get this? Anyway, we do not remove support for older
>> >> flashes for no reason.
>> >
>> > I did not insist, you asked.
>> > Macronix stopped selling these chips 15 year ago.
>> > How long do you want to support old chips?
>>
>> It is not unusual for embedded products to have a support span of more
>> than 20 years. And chips such as these flashes might not be entirely new
>> when the product is introduced. So dropping support for SPI-NOR flashes
>> that are newer than 25-30 years is definitely a risk. Somebody out there
>> might not be able to upgrade to latest kernel versions anymore, which is
>> not a position we should put anyone in. With the increasing pressure to
>> upgrade product for better security, we definitely should not make it
>> more difficult to run newer kernel versions than absolutely necessary.
>
> I do not insist. Nor send any patch in this direction.

I did not say or imply that you did any such thing.

You asked an open question, and I gave my response. Nothing more,
nothing less.

> Each project can define the extent of backward compatibility.
> In terms of compilers, linkers and tools, i.e. build environment.
> In terms of standards like the C standard we use.
> In terms of network protocols.
> And also what Hardware do we support.
>
> There is no harm in asking where the boundaries are.
> All projects move their boundaries all the time.
> The Linux kernel is no exception.