[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230816154419.29011-A-hca@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 17:44:19 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] s390/ipl: fix virtual vs physical address confusion
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 03:29:42PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> The value of ipl_cert_list_addr boot variable contains
> a physical address, which is used directly. That works
> because virtual and physical address spaces are currently
> the same, but otherwise it is wrong.
>
> While at it, fix also a comment for the platform keyring.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c | 4 ++--
> arch/s390/kernel/setup.c | 2 +-
> security/integrity/platform_certs/load_ipl_s390.c | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Mimi, Jarkko, any objections from your side?
I would take this via the s390 tree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists