[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220824105229.00006c79@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 10:52:29 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
<ira.weiny@...el.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
"Ben Widawsky" <bwidawsk@...nel.org>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PCI: Allow drivers to request exclusive config
regions
>
> > What are you trying to protect yourself from, bogus bug reports by
> > people doing bad things and then blaming you? That's easy to handle,
> > just ignore them :)
>
> I asked Ira to push on this to protect the kernel from people like me,
> :). So, there is this massively complicated specification for device
> attestation and link integrity / encryption protection (SPDM and IDE)
> that has applications to both PCIe and CXL. I do not see a path in the
> near term to land that support in the kernel.
>
> DOE being user accessible though, lends itself to pure userspace
> implementations of SPDM and IDE infrastructure. I want to develop that
> infrastructure, but also have the kernel reserve the space / right to
> obviate that implementation with kernel control of the DOE mailbox, SPDM
> sessions, and IDE keys in the future.
Can't resist...
If anyone is at Plumbers (in person or virtually) the will be a BoF on
SPDM etc. Not scheduled yet...
https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1304/
Come join the Kernel vs Partly Kernel vs fully Userspace discussions.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists