Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto+bounces-4739-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 01:45:17 +0300
Message-Id: <D1RLIGJ6FYTA.4JNBEUEDEY9P@kernel.org>
Cc: <dpsmith@apertussolutions.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
 <mingo@redhat.com>, <bp@alien8.de>, <hpa@zytor.com>,
 <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, <ardb@kernel.org>, <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
 <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>, <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
 <jgg@ziepe.ca>, <luto@amacapital.net>, <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
 <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>, <davem@davemloft.net>, <corbet@lwn.net>,
 <ebiederm@xmission.com>, <dwmw2@infradead.org>, <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
 <kanth.ghatraju@oracle.com>, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
 <trenchboot-devel@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 09/19] x86: Secure Launch kernel late boot stub
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: <ross.philipson@oracle.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 <x86@kernel.org>, <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
 <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
 <kexec@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
 <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>
References: <20240531010331.134441-1-ross.philipson@oracle.com>
 <20240531010331.134441-10-ross.philipson@oracle.com>
 <D1RHYMFSVGSW.39IL7KFK8A47N@kernel.org>
 <e066d250-b657-472f-ad27-585a64a51a9f@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <e066d250-b657-472f-ad27-585a64a51a9f@oracle.com>

On Wed Jun 5, 2024 at 12:16 AM EEST,  wrote:
> On 6/4/24 12:58 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri May 31, 2024 at 4:03 AM EEST, Ross Philipson wrote:
> >> The routine slaunch_setup is called out of the x86 specific setup_arch=
()
> >> routine during early kernel boot. After determining what platform is
> >> present, various operations specific to that platform occur. This
> >> includes finalizing setting for the platform late launch and verifying
> >> that memory protections are in place.
> >=20
> > "memory protections" is not too helpful tbh.
> >=20
> > Better to describe very briefly the VT-d usage.
>
> We can enhance the commit message and talk about VT-d usage and what=20
> PMRs are and do.

Yep, pointing out exact things that you're dealing with is even more
useful once the feature has landed.

After some months one tends to start forgetting things, so it is good
to use commit messages as clues and reminders of essential concepts.

BR, Jarkko