linux-kernel - Re: Target architecture of amd-sbi driver

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: <20250915142213.3fa69cd8@endymion>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 14:22:13 +0200
From: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
To: "Gupta, Akshay" <Akshay.Gupta@....com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
 <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Naveen Krishna Chatradhi
 <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@....com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Target architecture of amd-sbi driver

On Mon, 15 Sep 2025 16:04:37 +0530, Gupta, Akshay wrote:
> On 9/15/2025 2:58 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > The amd-sbi Linux driver (sbrmi-i2c kernel module) can currently be
> > selected on all architectures. Is this driver intended to be used on
> > the host, or on the BMC, or both?
> >
> > If it's an host-side driver, it should not be proposed on non-x86
> > architectures by default and we should add a hardware dependency to it
> > (or'd with COMPILE_TEST to preserve build testing coverage). What do
> > you think?
> 
> Its not a host-side driver and is intended for BMC. Today we are using 
> over ARM and ARM64 BMC.

OK, thanks for clarifying. I think this information could be added to
Kconfig to benefit to all users and help them decide if they want to
build the driver or not. I'll send a patch.

-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support