[dmidecode] [PATCH] dmioem: decode HPE UEFI type 219 Misc Features

[Jerry Hoemann]

The incorrect "Misc Feature" bit in type 219 table was being used to
identify that the platform is capable of booting with UEFI.

For cooresponding kernel change please see:

commit(c42cbe41727a)

in linux-stable.

Signed-off-by: Jerry Hoemann <***@hpe.com>
---
dmioem.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/dmioem.c b/dmioem.c
index 8a72ac9..dfd14c7 100644
--- a/dmioem.c
+++ b/dmioem.c
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int dmi_decode_hp(const struct dmi_header *h)
feat = DWORD(data + 0x10);
printf("\tMisc. Features: 0x%08x\n", feat);
printf("\t\tiCRU: %s\n", feat & 0x0001 ? "Yes" : "No");
- printf("\t\tUEFI: %s\n", feat & 0x0408 ? "Yes" : "No");
+ printf("\t\tUEFI: %s\n", feat & 0x01400 ? "Yes" : "No");
break;

default:

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Jerry,

Post by Jerry Hoemann
The incorrect "Misc Feature" bit in type 219 table was being used to
identify that the platform is capable of booting with UEFI.
commit(c42cbe41727a)
in linux-stable.

In linux. linux-stable has backports of the commits, that's not
relevant in this case.

Post by Jerry Hoemann
---
dmioem.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/dmioem.c b/dmioem.c
index 8a72ac9..dfd14c7 100644
--- a/dmioem.c
+++ b/dmioem.c
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int dmi_decode_hp(const struct dmi_header *h)
feat = DWORD(data + 0x10);
printf("\tMisc. Features: 0x%08x\n", feat);
printf("\t\tiCRU: %s\n", feat & 0x0001 ? "Yes" : "No");
- printf("\t\tUEFI: %s\n", feat & 0x0408 ? "Yes" : "No");
+ printf("\t\tUEFI: %s\n", feat & 0x01400 ? "Yes" : "No");
break;

What's the rationale for using a 5-digit mask instead of 4-digit? It
makes both the change and the resulting code harder to read IMHO.

[Jerry Hoemann]

Post by Jean Delvare
Hi Jerry,

Post by Jerry Hoemann
The incorrect "Misc Feature" bit in type 219 table was being used to
identify that the platform is capable of booting with UEFI.
commit(c42cbe41727a)
in linux-stable.

In linux. linux-stable has backports of the commits, that's not
relevant in this case.

Will drop the cross reference.

Post by Jean Delvare

Post by Jerry Hoemann
---
dmioem.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/dmioem.c b/dmioem.c
index 8a72ac9..dfd14c7 100644
--- a/dmioem.c
+++ b/dmioem.c
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int dmi_decode_hp(const struct dmi_header *h)
feat = DWORD(data + 0x10);
printf("\tMisc. Features: 0x%08x\n", feat);
printf("\t\tiCRU: %s\n", feat & 0x0001 ? "Yes" : "No");
- printf("\t\tUEFI: %s\n", feat & 0x0408 ? "Yes" : "No");
+ printf("\t\tUEFI: %s\n", feat & 0x01400 ? "Yes" : "No");
break;

What's the rationale for using a 5-digit mask instead of 4-digit? It
makes both the change and the resulting code harder to read IMHO.

Will fix.

[Jean Delvare]

Post by Jerry Hoemann

Post by Jean Delvare
Hi Jerry,

Post by Jerry Hoemann
The incorrect "Misc Feature" bit in type 219 table was being used to
identify that the platform is capable of booting with UEFI.
commit(c42cbe41727a)
in linux-stable.

In linux. linux-stable has backports of the commits, that's not
relevant in this case.

Will drop the cross reference.

Referencing the kernel commit is a good idea. It is "linux-stable"
which is not correct.

[Jerry Hoemann]

Post by Jean Delvare

Post by Jerry Hoemann

Post by Jean Delvare
Hi Jerry,

Post by Jerry Hoemann
The incorrect "Misc Feature" bit in type 219 table was being used to
identify that the platform is capable of booting with UEFI.
commit(c42cbe41727a)
in linux-stable.

In linux. linux-stable has backports of the commits, that's not
relevant in this case.

Will drop the cross reference.

Referencing the kernel commit is a good idea. It is "linux-stable"
which is not correct.

Thanks for clarification. Will cite just Linux kernel.

Post by Jean Delvare
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support