Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933345AbdGSQWR (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:22:17 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:60990 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753513AbdGSQWP (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:22:15 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 18:22:04 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Kani, Toshimitsu" Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mchehab@kernel.org" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ghes_edac: add platform check to enable ghes_edac Message-ID: <20170719162204.GE16124@nazgul.tnic> References: <20170717215912.26070-1-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170717215912.26070-4-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170718060007.GB8736@nazgul.tnic> <20170718080836.GB8372@nazgul.tnic> <1500412288.2042.25.camel@hpe.com> <20170719055235.GD26030@nazgul.tnic> <1500480051.2042.27.camel@hpe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1500480051.2042.27.camel@hpe.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 565 Lines: 19 On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 04:10:07PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > I do prefer to avoid any white / black listing. But I do not see how > it solves the buggy DMI/SMBIOS info as an example of firmware bugs we > may have to deal with. So how do you want to deal with this? Maintain an evergrowing whitelist of platforms which are OK and then the moment a new platform comes along, you send a patch to add it to that whitelist? I'm sure you can see the problems with that approach. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --