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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C47EC2D0D2 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 20:50:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F25172082E for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 20:50:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="P0+F991o" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727510AbfLTUug (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2019 15:50:36 -0500 Received: from linux.microsoft.com ([13.77.154.182]:45136 "EHLO linux.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727422AbfLTUuf (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2019 15:50:35 -0500 Received: from [10.137.112.108] (unknown [131.107.174.108]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CCD0120106BA; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 12:50:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com CCD0120106BA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1576875035; bh=nCXI723Paiou2qhM6Iep4RO6p6kZcLH60+OZE/A0Wj0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=P0+F991oIoc1uIRq2J/OZoa8NNdiJNVhpC3IYKHSoWeKEVzWoyGJpgn/IA0hfphjZ nCpVTpTjTT/XO4EE8LWgHUL/5WmRvhOHCWBTF224K04MJRhQJqoH9udQdNhI5h6Cbx THFVWApuNdTRqU0hXUxLvUP+mtueX23TYjvW8Ibo= Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] IMA: Deferred measurement of keys To: Mimi Zohar , James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Cc: eric.snowberg@oracle.com, dhowells@redhat.com, mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@google.com, sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org References: <20191218164434.2877-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <1576868506.5241.65.camel@linux.ibm.com> <589b893b-52e4-783c-0f32-608ed1cfd7f9@linux.microsoft.com> <1576870595.5241.83.camel@linux.ibm.com> From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian Message-ID: <9f346e6d-04f2-b8cd-bf67-f1cee59d9630@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 12:50:34 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1576870595.5241.83.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/20/19 11:36 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote: >> >> Shall I create a new patch set to address that and have that be reviewed >> independent of this patch set? > > If it is just a single additional patch, feel free to post it without > a cover letter. Sure >> >> Like you'd suggested earlier, we can wait for a certain time, after IMA >> is initialized, and free the queue if a custom policy was not loaded. > > Different types of systems vary in boot time, but perhaps a certain > amount of time after IMA is initialized would be consistent.  This > would need to work for IoT devices/sensors to servers. > > Mimi > Yes - I agree. thanks, -lakshmi