From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:11:36 -0700 Message-ID: <51490CC8.80903@zytor.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-security-module-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "kexec-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" , "linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On 03/19/2013 06:07 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Yeah, I'd like the option of relaxing restrictions when drivers explicitly opt in based on iommu support. When drivers opt in they can provide an interface. The interesting case becomes non-drivers. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.