netdev - Re: [PATCH] Export ACPI _DSM provided firmware instance number and string name to sysfs

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: <20110107142750.21ea39f0@jbarnes-desktop>
Date:	Fri, 7 Jan 2011 14:27:50 -0800
From:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To:	<Narendra_K@...l.com>
Cc:	<Matt_Domsch@...l.com>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<Jordan_Hargrave@...l.com>, <Charles_Rose@...l.com>,
	<Vijay_Nijhawan@...l.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Export ACPI _DSM provided firmware instance number and
 string name to sysfs

On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 11:24:36 -0800
<Narendra_K@...l.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 08:02:03PM +0530, Domsch, Matt wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 08:42:39AM -0800, Narendra_K@...l.com wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > This patch exports ACPI _DSM provided firmware instance number and
> > > string name to sysfs.
> > > 
> > > Please review -
> > 
> > There are now two different meanings for the 'index' file:
> > 
> > 1) SMBIOS-provided "type instance" value, which I've only seen in
> >    range [1..N] for N devices, monotonically stepwise increasing.
> > 
> > 2) ACPI-provided "index" value, which per spec only needs to be a
> >    "sort key", not starting at 0 or 1, and while monotonically
> >    increasing, not necessarily stepwise.  It's perfectly valid for the
> >    values to be (12, 16, 27, 29) if that's convenient for BIOS to
> >    generate.
> > 
> > Therefore, a consumer of this value (such as biosdevname) must know
> > which of the two it's dealing with, and either accept the value as-is,
> > or sort the value list.  While I suppose it could sort the value list
> > in either case, I'd prefer the ACPI value to be exposed in its own
> > file, perhaps 'acpi_index', to make this explicit rather than
> > implicit.
> > 
> > 'label' is fine for either case, with ACPI taking priority over
> > SMBIOS if both happen to be present.
> > 

Applied, thanks.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html