[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu9v+BUTySe=0OWmjPSCe5qShO5r4P4Np7M8q2jR_tMcDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 18:39:09 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
Dave Olsthoorn <dave@...aar.me>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@...keon.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nicolas Broeking <nbroeking@...com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Torsten Duwe <duwe@...e.de>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] efi/firmware/platform-x86: Add EFI embedded fw support
On 2 June 2018 at 05:39, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 5:53 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Here is v6 of my patch-set to add support for EFI embedded fw to the kernel.
>>
>> This patch-set applies on top of the "[PATCH v7 00/14] firmware_loader
>> changes for v4.18" series from mcgrof.
>>
>> It now also depends on the series from Andy Lutomirski which allow using the
>> sha256 code in a standalone manner. Andy what is the status of those?
>
> They're currently sort of on hold, since Jason Donenfeld is working on
> a more comprehensive solution to the same problem. Jason, I don't
> suppose the sha256 part of your patch set is ready?
>
> Ard, if Jason's patches are too far in the future, would you be okay
> with merging a cleaned-up version of my patch for sha256 even if the
> sha512 equivalent isn't there?
>
I'm not sure what you are asking me here. I'd be fine merging a
version of Hans's patches that uses a suitable cryptographic hash
algorithm, but the implementation of that would likely belong
somewhere under crypto/, and so it is ultimately someone else's call
(although I'm happy to review)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists