[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220408085120.GV163591@kunlun.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:51:20 +0200
From: Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>
To: Coiby Xu <coxu@...hat.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@...e.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Philipp Rudo <prudo@...hat.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar@...ux.ibm.com>,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Kairui Song <kasong@...hat.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Unifrom keyring support across architectures and
functions
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 03:47:04PM +0800, Coiby Xu wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> As mentioned by Baoquan, I have a patch set "[PATCH v5 0/3] use more
> system keyrings to verify arm64 kdump kernel image signature" [1]. The
> differences between your patch set and mine are as follows, - my patch set
> only adds support for arm64 while yours also extends to
> s390
> - I made the code for verifying signed kernel image as PE file in x86
> public so arm64 can reuse the code as well which seems to be better
> approach
> - I also cleaned up clean up arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig
>
> Would you mind if I integrate your first 3 patches with mine as follows
> - for arm64, I'll use my version
> - for s390, I'll use your version
Great
less code duplication is always good.
Thanks
Michal
>
> For your last patch which allows to use of platform keyring for
> signature verification of kernel module, I'll leave it to yourself. How
> do you think about it?
>
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220401013118.348084-1-coxu@redhat.com/
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 08:39:37PM +0100, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> > While testing KEXEC_SIG on powerpc I noticed discrepancy in support for
> > different keyrings across architectures and between KEXEC_SIG and
> > MODULE_SIG. Fix this by enabling suport for the missing keyrings.
> >
> > The latter two patches obviously conflict with the ongoing module code
> > cleanup. If they turn out desirable I will add them to the other series
> > dealing with KEXEC_SIG.
> >
> > The arm patches can be merged independently.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Michal
> >
> > Michal Suchanek (4):
> > Fix arm64 kexec forbidding kernels signed with keys in the secondary
> > keyring to boot
> > kexec, KEYS, arm64: Make use of platform keyring for signature
> > verification
> > kexec, KEYS, s390: Make use of built-in and secondary keyring for
> > signature verification
> > module, KEYS: Make use of platform keyring for signature verification
> >
> > arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c | 13 +++++++++++--
> > arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> > kernel/module_signing.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.31.1
> >
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Coiby
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists