From: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
roberto.sassu@huawei.com, Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com, dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com,
eric.snowberg@oracle.com, jarkko@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca,
sudeep.holla@kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, oupton@kernel.org,
joey.gouly@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, noodles@meta.com,
sebastianene@google.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] security: ima: call ima_init() again at late_initcall_sync for defered TPM
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 06:57:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aesGU8a3mbVzvteH@e129823.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhRQWHEWQ5NzOPiu8jtYv6UsRm8WVS4fd74AbkOcAd4y_g@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Paul,
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 2:13 PM Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Sounds good. Once the patch is posted, I’ll review it as well.
> > Sorry again for the noise, and thanks for your patience ;)
>
> My apologies for not getting a chance to look at this patchset sooner.
>
> This seems like an obvious, perhaps even stupid, question, but I have
> to ask: if IMA can be properly initialized via late_initcall_sync(),
> why not simply do the initialization in late_initcall_sync() and drop
> the late_initcall() initialization?
>
> Does any IMA functionality suffer if initialization waits until
> late_initcall_sync()? If so, it seems non-critical if waiting until
> _sync() is acceptable, as it appears in these patches/comments.
This is the way first patch did, and here is some discussion for this
(Might you have seen, but in case of you missed):
- https://lore.kernel.org/all/a6a0e15286c983d720de227c6827adbe976c5b9b.camel@linux.ibm.com/
Thanks.
--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-24 5:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-22 16:24 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] fix FF-A call failed with pKVM when ff-a driver is built-in Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-22 16:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] security: ima: call ima_init() again at late_initcall_sync for defered TPM Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-22 17:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-22 18:46 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-22 19:41 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-22 21:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-23 5:55 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 11:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-23 11:20 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 12:34 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 12:53 ` Jonathan McDowell
2026-04-23 13:07 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 13:43 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-23 13:55 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 14:03 ` Jonathan McDowell
2026-04-23 14:33 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-23 18:13 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-24 1:27 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-24 5:57 ` Yeoreum Yun [this message]
2026-04-24 20:15 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-24 20:57 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-24 21:08 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-24 22:00 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-24 22:10 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-24 22:49 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-28 1:31 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-28 13:21 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-30 0:36 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-29 13:33 ` Roberto Sassu
2026-04-30 0:43 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-25 4:53 ` Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-28 1:31 ` Paul Moore
2026-04-23 14:48 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-23 17:02 ` Jonathan McDowell
2026-04-23 17:13 ` Mimi Zohar
2026-04-22 16:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] tpm: tpm_crb_ffa: revert defered_probed when tpm_crb_ffa is built-in Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 10:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2026-04-22 16:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] firmware: arm_ffa: revert ffa_init() initcall level to device_initcall Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 9:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-04-22 16:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] firmware: arm_ffa: check pkvm initailised when initailise ffa driver Yeoreum Yun
2026-04-23 8:34 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-04-23 10:29 ` Yeoreum Yun
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=aesGU8a3mbVzvteH@e129823.arm.com \
--to=yeoreum.yun@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=noodles@earth.li \
--cc=noodles@meta.com \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=sebastianene@google.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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.