From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69D563AE6F7; Mon, 15 Jun 2026 20:39:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781555952; cv=none; b=nyDmz4d7ag5PQROw4aGLu+XEPoYvPNvn+KqWiMsd+PUTq5yFoNbvQUKwGGt9rhe2j7Dx/HJfXn9g0XsC7uRcZuFxhXV6O7BtROCxLOw497jLdKe0u2vl4mlJ9btfKe4bwOj0qZ7RiQ9HNo6En3QRVirUTbLjlkRmMpPujrzz0c4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781555952; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0JtCklaLGL7QD15IVn/Yl1ERNO17IxblN4L2EYLsAV8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=fnHo4sQ9Q5APpFmCSknI5yX+d/J72mYZMjQs+znUFZrcThcyN+zscunF0rSSSRahsa4r39N/JLsDIgQgmCH2EpmW/nJ2OEOQHUh5JmQfJ+bEmAbQr90ljkSiahbD2lPjh2vfOZ2G+sqpePH+KCY/ZhwBC072L+wgAVf8NYxXYfo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lfkzhzUC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lfkzhzUC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D88DA1F000E9; Mon, 15 Jun 2026 20:39:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781555951; bh=8cBX8ViJcjjtQ+mUp4F9mfK8iMlxr9PtHmoBUj7imms=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=lfkzhzUCPBDANxd7vlbZ4sfcZ6SPmg4OpSlbk42TpNeILIQylkfg080MOWSo4XPXO bMpAEmFBAkVZOFDZRlo9JZdgsyNcWwvA/KDP4YYfS4nmWHPk/oc/Yh687LVBLvs8kd CMUjpWZ0fIz1pvuQ4ZT7t+kttINmM62H8ovkBs0bXmbsiqLCx83LQr9atXa5J6CkRo PVRRzwC5aut6DjhlRHjKyEhwJjBFfa1oAetG8F1GTeisQNLDy/K+ejrEjSsJnvdnp6 yR7CblkJ1gAN5uBrwPBnpupZPCJctnLs/jyDivFJ6TXo2kWJfMLYpI6viC3UKdpan/ eZ5hV+OiqosLA== Message-ID: Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2026 22:39:06 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/19] x86: define DPS root partition type UUIDs To: Matthew Wilcox , Dave Hansen Cc: Vincent Mailhol , Jens Axboe , Davidlohr Bueso , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org References: <20260615-discoverable-root_partitions-v1-0-39c78fac42e2@kernel.org> <20260615-discoverable-root_partitions-v1-12-39c78fac42e2@kernel.org> <03be57ae-0e41-4b8a-adc5-bdd85ccce951@intel.com> From: Vincent Mailhol Content-Language: en-US Autocrypt: addr=mailhol@kernel.org; keydata= xjMEZluomRYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAf+/PnQvy9LCWNSJLbhc+AOUsR2cNVonvxhDk/KcW7FvN JFZpbmNlbnQgTWFpbGhvbCA8bWFpbGhvbEBrZXJuZWwub3JnPsKZBBMWCgBBFiEE7Y9wBXTm fyDldOjiq1/riG27mcIFAmdfB/kCGwMFCQp/CJcFCwkIBwICIgIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgcC F4AACgkQq1/riG27mcKBHgEAygbvORJOfMHGlq5lQhZkDnaUXbpZhxirxkAHwTypHr4A/joI 2wLjgTCm5I2Z3zB8hqJu+OeFPXZFWGTuk0e2wT4JzjgEZx4y8xIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQJrb YZzu0JG5w8gxE6EtQe6LmxKMqP6EyR33sA+BR9pLAwEIB8J+BBgWCgAmFiEE7Y9wBXTmfyDl dOjiq1/riG27mcIFAmceMvMCGwwFCQPCZwAACgkQq1/riG27mcJU7QEA+LmpFhfQ1aij/L8V zsZwr/S44HCzcz5+jkxnVVQ5LZ4BANOCpYEY+CYrld5XZvM8h2EntNnzxHHuhjfDOQ3MAkEK In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 15/06/2026 at 20:05, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 09:46:41AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: >> There are a lot of ways to do this. I'm just not a super big fan of the >> current proposal. >> >> So, boiling it down: >> >> 1. Should more than one UUID be supported per kernel build? >> 2. Should the UUIDs be defined in arch code or generic code? >> 3. Kconfig or #ifdefs? > > Further questions ... why do this in the kernel? Most of the plumbing was already there so that the feature is still tiny. It seems like a reasonable trade-off to me. > Seems perfectly suited to be in initramfs where we can throw away the > code after boot. The added code uses the __init attribute for this exact reason: so that its memory can be reclaimed after. -- Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol