Re: [PATCH] SPI LPC information kernel module

[Richard Hughes]

On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 09:56, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Again, which makes it seem like securityfs is not the thing for this, as
> it describes the hardware, not a security model which is what securityfs
> has been for in the past, right?

It describes the hardware platform. From a fwupd perspective I don't
mind if the BC attributes are read from securityfs, sysfs or even read
from an offset in a file from /proc... I guess sysfs makes sense if
securityfs is defined for things like the LSM or lockdown status,
although I also thought sysfs was for devices *in* the platform, not
the platform itself. I guess exposing the platform registers in sysfs
is no more weird than exposing things like the mei device and rfkill.

Richard