[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0960C132-581C-4881-8948-C566657C3998@alien8.de>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 11:25:22 +0000
From: Boris Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@...com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Carry forward IMA measurement log on kexec on x86_64
On May 9, 2022 10:40:01 AM UTC, Jonathan McDowell <noodles@...com> wrote:
>> powerpc and ARM64 both achieve this using device tree with a
>> "linux,ima-kexec-buffer" node. x86 platforms generally don't make use of
>> device tree
What's wrong with making x86 use the same devicetree node(s)?
--
Sent from a small device: formatting sux and brevity is inevitable.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists