Hi, (Andrei, looks like your mails are being hard line wrapped around 100 cols.) On Fri, Oct 21 2011, Andrei Warkentin wrote: > What does power locking do that force_ro currently doesn't achieve? The power-lock is used to go read only until the next time power is reset, even if the kernel later asks for r/w. This is used on some devices such as the HTC Desire Z/G2 as a security mechanism -- the bootloader switches to power r/o just before running the kernel, so the kernel itself can't modify the boot kernel image. .. except it can, because the G2 hackers worked out how to glitch the eMMC's power rail using a kernel module that hits a GPIO, making it come out of r/o, and managed to make the MMC layer cope with the device needing reinit without crashing userspace. But you get the idea. > The permalocking brick-potential (more like paper-weight-potential) is > IMO unacceptably high that something like this is just accessible via > a sysfs attribute. This is exactly why the boot partitions were put > under force_ro, so that some poor sap wouldn't end up nuking the boot > partitions (with obvious consequences), and permalocking seems even > nastier. I agree. Does anyone have an argument for including either of these? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
