Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <594445d01e085875b97b46be726247f89d1e6661.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 00/10] Carry forward IMA measurement log on kexec on
 ARM64
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc:     Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>,
        "AKASHI, Takahiro" <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        vincenzo.frascino@arm.com, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
        Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@suse.com>,
        Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@chromium.org>, tao.li@vivo.com,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
        Prakhar Srivastava <prsriva@linux.microsoft.com>,
        balajib@linux.microsoft.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Date:   Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:39:55 -0500
In-Reply-To: <cf7930239b93044a1be353556b7dc730e024f658.camel@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20210209182200.30606-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
         <20210210171500.GA2328209@robh.at.kernel.org>
         <5c002c32-bc49-acda-c641-7b1494ea292d@linux.microsoft.com>
         <CAL_JsqLmdqfFF8u=dE+dQz+6ngv=moWkQF8tpZjUCX-vHuvU_w@mail.gmail.com>
         <cf7930239b93044a1be353556b7dc730e024f658.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 2021-02-10 at 15:55 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-02-10 at 14:42 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:33 AM Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
> 
> > Ideally, we don't apply the same patch in 2 branches. It looks like
> > there's a conflict but no real dependence on the above patch (the
> > ima_buffer part). The conflict seems trivial enough that Linus can
> > resolve it in the merge window.
> > 
> > Or Mimi can take the whole thing if preferred?
> 
> How about I create a topic branch with just the two patches, allowing
> both of us to merge it?   There shouldn't be a problem with re-writing
> next-integrity history.

The 2 patches are now in the ima-kexec-fixes branch.

Mimi