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: <D5B6VSE24UFU.3IMXJC23PCNFW@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2024 00:18:39 +0200
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "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 Sat Nov 2, 2024 at 12:04 AM EET, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01 2024 at 23:19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri Nov 1, 2024 at 11:13 PM EET, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >> I think we can sort them out independently as long as we find a
> >> conclusion how to address locality change.
> >
> > And to be fair: there was no reaction from anyone. It is mostly x86
> > patch set, meaning that I was waiting for some reaction first from that
> > side.  And I did respond to that when it came.
>
> The x86 side is mostly self contained, so the damage there is minimal,
> but the TPM parts are changing the generic operations and the x86 parts
> depend on them.
>
> So let's not create a chicken and egg problem and solve the TPM parts,
> which at my cursory glance are partially legitimate fixes, independent
> of the actual trenchboot x86 functionality.

Yeah, I'm already writing a (draft/RFC) patch to demonstrate my
proposal that I sent so all good.

>
> Thanks,
>
>         tglx

BR, Jarkko