From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1208E6F08E for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:19:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:References:To:From:Subject: Cc:Message-Id:Date:Mime-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=X2JDvUvEq7rUTgJcu2dro1zk4xkCsG1h3oJrGTyjYUM=; b=qjJse0e/87DeQZ sMV9/NzYW0OeX1zakT7PWi048VIxx0JnHbFxdwsyg+4CNvvrw4M89CyVVNRp2jTysHBFrMuAQZtUI pZ71MYzqPscvBlK3LD2ihlLpQ4j2yty2VziSwnc8lzHbD21tr4oUsWm580B4XnAETW6diGak/Z3ei fUQ10vXYkEmrSAwlAGJ5A/jGM4Rm/qQLzHRsjd3Ql0dTQPKFriaJE+e9qRayIOQ/tNZm5U5fG3/9W WLT8w7Rtz7ZM6QeLPZ9NUCuzDYV5mPR2P0ONcN2FqdJposPABEEdtK/nRvInrgCfu91bGIc9AS/pG yJyK9rwmqItUxpdqmlvQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1t6z3m-00000008Lj1-14Hp; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 21:19:58 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([139.178.84.217]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1t6z3Z-00000008Leg-09hd for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 21:19:47 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0FED5C5E47; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:18:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9031C4CECD; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:19:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1730495983; bh=fJEg2VjMXer2Y0al47UWb2qt+VXk29+LnZoE+tlChVM=; h=Date:Cc:Subject:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=nHYL0beIEk+vI+DD7w/Us6zMyJvldIqAHUSHcrklNSvCq11LHVJ6CBt5xv78b/JJC dPgfCM0V6snWFNmONDbXmhzak1nJPTLPySPFRUP6u0ExWLG4v595JsxTxoCBMrdjFC MemL5Z6ImC8jJD4GJHp89n7ZT8Hlxi8POl1YslvSCwUkZcXMSg4Rv6kE/ZzPa3pG1C hh/T4YG/hSqq/sGxKd6WvIuzu+pTMu7CuG8uE9ou0AIh3M3TG0vQsvpSUDj273uU/N hPD62pWdslpiS1uhT+lzHqwad/pyPyc8nOEunPm6wT3zzTJD7lqpahjKEqBJu4hL8U v723ef+lxzjkA== Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 23:19:38 +0200 Message-Id: Cc: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/20] x86: Trenchboot secure dynamic launch Linux kernel support From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" To: "Jarkko Sakkinen" , "Thomas Gleixner" , "Ross Philipson" , , , , , , , , X-Mailer: aerc 0.18.2 References: <20240913200517.3085794-1-ross.philipson@oracle.com> <87a5eivgku.ffs@tglx> In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20241101_141945_490847_F7D4E0DC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 29.85 ) X-BeenThere: kexec@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+kexec=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri Nov 1, 2024 at 11:13 PM EET, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri Nov 1, 2024 at 10:34 PM EET, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 01 2024 at 12:28, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Fri Sep 13, 2024 at 11:04 PM EEST, Ross Philipson wrote: > > >> A quick note on terminology. The larger open source project itself is called > > >> TrenchBoot, which is hosted on Github (links below). The kernel feature enabling > > >> the use of Dynamic Launch technology is referred to as "Secure Launch" within > > >> the kernel code. As such the prefixes sl_/SL_ or slaunch/SLAUNCH will be seen > > >> in the code. The stub code discussed above is referred to as the SL stub. > > > > > > 1. I don't see any tags in most of the patches so don't get the rush. This > > > includes also patches for x86. Why I would care to review TPM patches > > > when there is over a dozen unreviewed and untested patches before it? > > > 2. TPM patches have been in circulation in and out of the patch set > > > for some time now with little or no improvement. > > > > > > Why the sudden buzz? I have not heard much about this since last early > > > summer. Have to spend some time recalling what this is about anyway. I > > > cannot trust that my tags make any sense before more reviewed/tested-by > > > tags before the TPM patches. > > > > If I intend to merge the patches then I surely have looked at them > > deeply. I don't have to send a reviewed-by just to apply them > > afterwards. > > > > There was enough motion on these patches and this posting is in your > > inbox for 6 weeks now without any reaction from you. > > > > The TPM changes are very much independent from the x86 specific ones, so > > why do you want x86 review tags in order to look at the ones which are > > specific to your subsystem especially as some of them seem to address > > real short comings there independent of trenchboot. > > I think we can sort them out independently as long as we find a > conclusion how to address locality change. And to be fair: there was no reaction from anyone. It is mostly x86 patch set, meaning that I was waiting for some reaction first from that side. And I did respond to that when it came. IMHO: let's get a solution for that one problem and then it should be fine as far as I'm concerned. BR, Jarkko _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec