linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 00/13] selftests/sgx: Fix compilation errors

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <CWG522A78YHD.37CO0T9F3FVXB@suppilovahvero>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2023 00:32:22 +0300
From:   "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     "Jo Van Bulck" <jo.vanbulck@...euven.be>,
        "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>,
        "linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Jo Van Bulck" <jo.vanbulck@...kuleuven.be>
Cc:     "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/13] selftests/sgx: Fix compilation errors

On Fri Oct 13, 2023 at 2:45 PM EEST, Jo Van Bulck wrote:
> On 10.10.23 11:44, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > Folks (sorry for top posting): I've now taken my old NUC7 out of the
> > dust and tested the series :-)
> > 
> > Tested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
>
> Thanks for testing this Jarkko! Not sure on next steps, do you want me 
> to re-post the series with the Tested-by tag for all commits or will you 
> add that? Let me know if something from my side is needed.

Dave, can you pick these patches to the x86 tree with my tested-by
added? Sorry for latency. It is flu season in Finland and I've been
functional varying last week because of that.

> > Off-topic: I wish both Intel and AMD straighten up and deliver some "home friendly" development hardware for the  latest stuff. Just my
> > stance but the biggest quality risk I see in both TDX and SNP is that
> > the patches are made by an enterprise and reviewed (properly) *only*
> > by other huge enterprises.
>
> Yes, I totally agree on this. It is really unfortunate that things like 
> SGX are not (anymore) available on home consumer hardware and you have 
> to buy expensive servers for this, which also change every new CPU 
> generation. Having some kind of "developer boards" like is more the case 
> in embedded systems would be a great and very welcome evolution, if only 
> it were to happen..
>
> > I skim status of both from time to time but yeah not much attachment
> > or motivation to do more than that as you either need a cloud access
> > or partnership with Intel or AMD. "Indie" style seems to be disliked
> > these days... You can extrapolate from this that there must be a bunch
> > of maintainers around the Linux kernel that feel the same. Not saying
> > that particularly my contribution would be that important.
> > 
> > Sort of even if let's say Intel would provide me a partner access I
> > might not be that interested because I prefer my own (physical)
> > computers.
>
> I also understand this and share the concern. FWIW for some things 
> (e.g., uarch attack research) remote access does also not really hold up 
> to bare-metal access IMO.
>
> Best,
> Jo

BR, Jarkko