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;
Date:   Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:37:13 +0100
From:   Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        hpa@zytor.com, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Cfir Cohen <cfir@google.com>,
        Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@google.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Mike Stunes <mstunes@vmware.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Martin Radev <martin.b.radev@gmail.com>,
        Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
        linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] kexec: Allow architecture code to opt-out at
 runtime
Message-ID: <YYFpOfovSN2Af+ux@suse.de>
References: <20210913155603.28383-1-joro@8bytes.org>
 <20210913155603.28383-2-joro@8bytes.org>
 <YYARccITlowHABg1@zn.tnic>
 <87pmrjbmy9.fsf@disp2133>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <87pmrjbmy9.fsf@disp2133>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 04:11:42PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> I seem to remember the consensus when this was reviewed that it was
> unnecessary and there is already support for doing something like
> this at a more fine grained level so we don't need a new kexec hook.

It was a discussion, no consenus :)

I still think it is better to solve this in generic code for everybody
to re-use than with an hack in the architecture hooks.

More and more platforms which enable confidential computing features
may need this hook in the future.

Regards,

-- 
J?rg R?del
jroedel@suse.de

SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5
90409 N?rnberg
Germany
 
(HRB 36809, AG N?rnberg)
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Ivo Totev