Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-93304-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 12:02:01 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Revert "x86/kexec/64: Prevent kexec from 5-level
 paging to a 4-level only kernel"
Message-ID: <ZefquYIOFlCULYI/@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
References: <20240301185618.19663-1-bp@alien8.de>
 <20240301185618.19663-2-bp@alien8.de>
 <ZeWnrhzU86pz7y5Z@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
 <20240304111127.GAZeWsX3gBabiwrrVV@fat_crate.local>
 <ZeaUxXbZ3MB/pXm5@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
 <20240305115533.GBZecINWGlb73W0nQS@fat_crate.local>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240305115533.GBZecINWGlb73W0nQS@fat_crate.local>

On 03/05/24 at 12:55pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 11:43:01AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
.....
> 
> > If we take off the checking, and people want to jump from the new kernel
> > to an old kernel where 5-level kernel code haven't been added or
> > CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL is unset on purpose, it won't fail and prompt message at
> > all until 2nd kernel booting silently failed. E.g, the coming RHEL10 anchor
> > a upstream kernel w/o the flag checking, people want to kexec/kdump jump
> > from rhel10 to an old rhel7 kernel. It could be an extreme case, while
> > revealing the scenario.
> 
> That is the only valid reason you've given until now. Yes, that makes
> sense - the removal of those flags should go together with the removal
> of CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL and making this feature unconditional.

Please forgive my awful expression.

> 
> Because, practically, that config item is enabled on every relevant
> x86 kernel config out there. It would be silly if not.

I agree. Thanks for looking into this.