linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 00/20] x86: Trenchboot secure dynamic launch Linux kernel support

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: <87a5eivgku.ffs@tglx>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 21:34:25 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>, Ross Philipson
 <ross.philipson@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
 linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Cc: dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
 hpa@...or.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, ardb@...nel.org,
 mjg59@...f.ucam.org, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
 peterhuewe@....de, jgg@...pe.ca, luto@...capital.net,
 nivedita@...m.mit.edu, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
 corbet@....net, ebiederm@...ssion.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
 baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, kanth.ghatraju@...cle.com,
 andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, trenchboot-devel@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/20] x86: Trenchboot secure dynamic launch Linux
 kernel support

On Fri, Nov 01 2024 at 12:28, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri Sep 13, 2024 at 11:04 PM EEST, Ross Philipson wrote:
>> A quick note on terminology. The larger open source project itself is called
>> TrenchBoot, which is hosted on Github (links below). The kernel feature enabling
>> the use of Dynamic Launch technology is referred to as "Secure Launch" within
>> the kernel code. As such the prefixes sl_/SL_ or slaunch/SLAUNCH will be seen
>> in the code. The stub code discussed above is referred to as the SL stub.
>
> 1. I don't see any tags in most of the patches so don't get the rush. This
>    includes also patches for x86. Why I would care to review TPM patches
>    when there is over a dozen unreviewed and untested patches before it?
> 2. TPM patches have been in circulation in and out of the patch set
>    for some time now with little or no improvement.
>
> Why the sudden buzz? I have not heard much about this since last early
> summer.  Have to spend some time recalling what this is about anyway. I
> cannot trust that my tags make any sense before more reviewed/tested-by
> tags before the TPM patches.

If I intend to merge the patches then I surely have looked at them
deeply. I don't have to send a reviewed-by just to apply them
afterwards.

There was enough motion on these patches and this posting is in your
inbox for 6 weeks now without any reaction from you.

The TPM changes are very much independent from the x86 specific ones, so
why do you want x86 review tags in order to look at the ones which are
specific to your subsystem especially as some of them seem to address
real short comings there independent of trenchboot.

Thanks,

        tglx