From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>,
Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar@linux.ibm.com>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Christophe Leroy <chleroy@kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>, Coiby Xu <coxu@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] integrity: Eliminate weak definition of arch_get_secureboot()
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 13:55:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260312205533.GC2747807@ax162> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a985c90d9df8ba0fc63f65117cc8e884f70e6035.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 12:07:41PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> I pushed out the patch to next-integrity, but am a bit concerned about the
> definition:
>
> +config HAVE_ARCH_GET_SECUREBOOT
> + def_bool EFI
> +
What is concerning about the definition with regards to s390?
> Has anyone actually tested this patch on s390, not just compiled it? If so, I'd
> appreciate a tested-by tag.
It would be good to test (if it is possible to test in QEMU, I am happy
to attempt to do so). As far as I can tell, 31a6a07eefeb placed
arch_get_secureboot() in such a way that the __weak definition would be
used when CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE was disabled, even though ipl_secure_flag
should always be available, which this patch avoids.
Cheers,
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-12 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-09 20:37 [PATCH] integrity: Eliminate weak definition of arch_get_secureboot() Nathan Chancellor
2026-03-12 15:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-03-12 16:07 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-03-12 20:55 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2026-03-13 15:35 ` Mimi Zohar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260312205533.GC2747807@ax162 \
--to=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=coxu@redhat.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
--cc=egorenar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.