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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479EBC61DA4 for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 16:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229525AbjBIQ1f (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2023 11:27:35 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42154 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229482AbjBIQ1f (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2023 11:27:35 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E2B62ED5A for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 08:27:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1675960054; x=1707496054; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9M+jCybV1yApcakYwNAUtZNPevLpW0gaG6aUc0Nx6nU=; b=iVSPmCErGgJIzalEr6gvGCdFN7q9ZHSROvfOzLAApXAuABroYCiC4nGA I2fztWXbBtca3M/TJcbPX9wF5l3md0o8H6JiD3D8drMPGHCBWiTfXCmiL HYdRHjzL+GamjHqBQ/ZCQ2dRAaGlde0SadHNHVAeUPPmMlGNmnYelzqSV YEiNNAc9+kVRsv1g9fBGCpFW0LY+DbT8nn4rHb+08J3oJLCPAfOdXXRoi uzMqe77XNVK4lbCTvJYDYlqoQ3Hs/qARasz7xTpzDojq0HOoxrZF2dlm4 RpVjkDQEQrVv3eH1tBAY6gKtbxbG3IKkGrUImQvm+VU9w2eUCXRHiFfPH Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10615"; a="332291170" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,284,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="332291170" Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2023 08:27:33 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10615"; a="996578405" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,284,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="996578405" Received: from aryanpra-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.150.227]) ([10.212.150.227]) by fmsmga005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2023 08:27:32 -0800 Message-ID: <43146301-b99f-be9c-b2e5-ad7a21c46c4b@intel.com> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 08:27:30 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] efi: x86: Wire up IBT annotation in memory attributes table Content-Language: en-US To: Ard Biesheuvel , Kees Cook Cc: Mark Rutland , Peter Zijlstra , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen References: <20230206124938.272988-1-ardb@kernel.org> <20230206124938.272988-4-ardb@kernel.org> <63e51b92.170a0220.ca7b5.2b23@mx.google.com> From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On 2/9/23 08:23, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > I have no strong preference one way or the other, but given that > apm_32.c is not the epicenter of new development, and the call from > EFI code is self-documenting already (' > ibt_save(efi_disable_ibt_for_runtime)', I'm inclined to just queue the > patch as-is, and leave it to whoever feels inclined to spend more free > time on this to come up with some nice polish to put on top. > > Unless anyone minds? No objections from the x86 side.