From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: "Jason J. Herne" <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
alifm@linux.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] [PATCH] s390-bios: Skip bootmap signature entries
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 13:05:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190506130542.635513b1.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9493076a-6bbe-21eb-4df3-2b54dc6376b9@de.ibm.com>
On Mon, 6 May 2019 12:46:50 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 06.05.19 12:34, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 May 2019 12:18:42 +0200
> > Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> I think we should not. Those entries might have sematic elements that the guest
> >> wants to enforce. I do not think that this will come, but imagine a boot entry
> >> that mandates some security wishes (e.g. do only run on non-shared cores).
> >
> > Can we split the namespace for BOOT_SCRIPT into 'ignore if you don't
> > know what that is' and 'fail if you don't know what that is'? I'm
> > completely confused how 'optional' those entries are supposed to be...
>
> Since we do not know if and what future entries will come the current default
> of failing seems the best approach. We can then add things to pc-bios when
> necessary.
That's where I'm coming from: Have some values where unknown entries
lead to (desired) failure, and others where unknown entries are simply
ignored. That would give us automatic toleration for optional entries.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-06 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-29 13:09 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390-bios: Skip bootmap signature entries Jason J. Herne
2019-04-29 13:09 ` Jason J. Herne
2019-04-29 13:40 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-29 13:40 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-29 13:45 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-04-29 13:45 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-04-30 9:24 ` Peter Oberparleiter
2019-04-30 9:24 ` Peter Oberparleiter
2019-04-30 9:44 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-30 9:44 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-03 9:34 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-03 9:34 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-06 8:08 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-06 13:03 ` Jason J. Herne
2019-05-06 10:01 ` [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] " David Hildenbrand
2019-05-06 10:10 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-06 10:16 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-06 10:18 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-06 10:34 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-06 10:46 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-06 11:05 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-05-06 11:13 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-06 11:23 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-06 11:24 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-06 10:14 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-06 10:30 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-06 10:45 ` Christian Borntraeger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190506130542.635513b1.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=jjherne@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).