From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([2001:1868:205::10] helo=mail.zytor.com) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1TtlC2-0000Ky-VD for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:27:11 +0000 Message-ID: <50F07588.90902@zytor.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:26:48 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 00/11] xen: Initial kexec/kdump implementation References: <50DC58C4.3000307@citrix.com> <874nj7qsor.fsf@xmission.com> <50E41973.9050705@citrix.com> <20130104142257.GC3346@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <50E6F81D02000078000B3245@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20130104170751.GB3472@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <20130104191146.GC6721@phenom.dumpdata.com> <20130107123404.GA2927@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <20130107162018.GJ3219@phenom.dumpdata.com> <87ehhsqrpr.fsf@xmission.com> <20130111165506.GD25620@phenom.dumpdata.com> In-Reply-To: <20130111165506.GD25620@phenom.dumpdata.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Andrew Cooper , Daniel Kiper , "x86@kernel.org" , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "Eric W. Biederman" , Jan Beulich , "maxim.uvarov@oracle.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , David Woodhouse , "vgoyal@redhat.com" > > And there is nothing fancy to be done for EFI and SecureBoot? Or is > that something that the kernel has to handle on its own (so somehow > passing some certificates to somewhere). > For EFI, no... other than passing the EFI parameters, which apparently is *not* currently done (David Woodhouse is working on it.) Secure boot is still a work in progress. -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 00/11] xen: Initial kexec/kdump implementation Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:26:48 -0800 Message-ID: <50F07588.90902@zytor.com> References: <50DC58C4.3000307@citrix.com> <874nj7qsor.fsf@xmission.com> <50E41973.9050705@citrix.com> <20130104142257.GC3346@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <50E6F81D02000078000B3245@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20130104170751.GB3472@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <20130104191146.GC6721@phenom.dumpdata.com> <20130107123404.GA2927@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <20130107162018.GJ3219@phenom.dumpdata.com> <87ehhsqrpr.fsf@xmission.com> <20130111165506.GD25620@phenom.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130111165506.GD25620@phenom.dumpdata.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Andrew Cooper , Daniel Kiper , "x86@kernel.org" , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "Eric W. Biederman" , Jan Beulich , "maxim.uvarov@oracle.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , David Woodhouse , "vgoyal@redhat.com" List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org > > And there is nothing fancy to be done for EFI and SecureBoot? Or is > that something that the kernel has to handle on its own (so somehow > passing some certificates to somewhere). > For EFI, no... other than passing the EFI parameters, which apparently is *not* currently done (David Woodhouse is working on it.) Secure boot is still a work in progress. -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755669Ab3AKU1X (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:27:23 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:51814 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753826Ab3AKU1W (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:27:22 -0500 Message-ID: <50F07588.90902@zytor.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:26:48 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk CC: "Eric W. Biederman" , Daniel Kiper , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Andrew Cooper , "x86@kernel.org" , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , Jan Beulich , "maxim.uvarov@oracle.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "vgoyal@redhat.com" , David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 00/11] xen: Initial kexec/kdump implementation References: <50DC58C4.3000307@citrix.com> <874nj7qsor.fsf@xmission.com> <50E41973.9050705@citrix.com> <20130104142257.GC3346@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <50E6F81D02000078000B3245@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20130104170751.GB3472@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <20130104191146.GC6721@phenom.dumpdata.com> <20130107123404.GA2927@host-192-168-1-59.local.net-space.pl> <20130107162018.GJ3219@phenom.dumpdata.com> <87ehhsqrpr.fsf@xmission.com> <20130111165506.GD25620@phenom.dumpdata.com> In-Reply-To: <20130111165506.GD25620@phenom.dumpdata.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > And there is nothing fancy to be done for EFI and SecureBoot? Or is > that something that the kernel has to handle on its own (so somehow > passing some certificates to somewhere). > For EFI, no... other than passing the EFI parameters, which apparently is *not* currently done (David Woodhouse is working on it.) Secure boot is still a work in progress. -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.