linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v14 13/19] x86/reboot: Secure Launch SEXIT support on reboot paths

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: <84ce64c8-838d-4b62-abb0-cf46282ce548@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 12:31:00 -0700
From: ross.philipson@...cle.com
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.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.dev
Cc: dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com, tglx@...utronix.de, 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,
        jarkko@...nel.org, 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 v14 13/19] x86/reboot: Secure Launch SEXIT support on
 reboot paths

On 4/21/25 3:57 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 4/21/25 09:27, Ross Philipson wrote:
>> @@ -788,6 +790,9 @@ static void native_machine_halt(void)
>>   
>>   	tboot_shutdown(TB_SHUTDOWN_HALT);
>>   
>> +	/* SEXIT done after machine_shutdown() to meet TXT requirements */
>> +	slaunch_finalize(1);
> 
> This is the kind of stuff that needs to get fixed up before this series
> can go _anywhere_.
> 
> "TXT requirements" is not useful to a maintainer. *WHAT* requirement?
> *WHY* must it be done this way?
> 
> This code is unmaintainable as it stands.

Sorry we understand the frustration especially for maintainers. We have 
gone over your responses so far. We will do whatever it takes to make 
this patch set maintainable and acceptable to upstream. I think we are 
starting to understand what the main issues are with the set overall 
from what you are pointing out.

Thank you for your feedback,
Ross