[Public] > -----Original Message----- > From: Jorge Lopez <jorgealtxwork@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, April 8, 2022 09:47 > To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxx>; platform-driver- > x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] Sure Admin Security Feature > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 4:21 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Hi Jorge, > > > > On 4/7/22 15:44, Jorge Lopez wrote: > > > Hans, Mario, > > > > > > The code links make references to code that implements the new > > > interfaces but there's > > > still code in the kernel that uses the old ones. > > > > I'm not sure what you mean with "uses the old ones" there never > > has been any kernel drivers for changing BIOS settings before > > the dell and lenovo drivers were merged. > > "uses the old ones" statement means that there are drivers on the tree > that change BIOS settings without having to convert to the new > standards. hp-wmi remained unsupported for many years so I can > understand why the security features need to use the standardized API. > > > > > Sure there are generic mechanisms like chardev-s and ioctls which > > are used for a whole bunch of things. But AFAIK there never was > > an API specifically for changing BIOS settings before. > > > > > I do agree we should > > > be forward looking > > > and want to be good participants in the kernel development, but can't > > > let our immediate > > > business needs be impacted with opportunities to enhance the driver to > > > take advantage > > > of the latest kernel features. > > > > > > Rewriting those security features will impact customer business > > > datelines requiring > > > HP to provide private releases as the kernel version changes. The > > > requested changes > > > will impact products in the market and HP ability to help customers to > > > migrate to Linux > > > from Windows products. > > > > This sounds like you are saying that you are already shipping > > a version of the driver with the non-standard API to customers. > > Shipping code to customers before even proposing it upstream is > > HP own choice and the results of that as such are HP's > > responsibility. > > > The products shipped to customers are Windows products and customers > are accustomed to how the data is reported and set. The goal for the > new security features in Linux is to help those customers migrate to > Linux with little or no change to their scripts/tools. I think if this is the situation then a userspace compatibility /conversion tool is your better answer than a large compatibility layer in debugfs.
