Am Freitag, 22 Juli 2016, 12:54:28 schrieb Michael Ellerman:
> Thiago Jung Bauermann writes:
> > So even if not ideal, the solution above is desirable for powerpc. We
> > would like to preserve the ability of allowing userspace to pass
> > parameters to the OS via the DTB, even if secure boot is e
Thiago Jung Bauermann writes:
> Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 18:03:35 schrieb Thiago Jung Bauermann:
>> Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 22:26:09 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
>> > However, the powerpc specific RTAS runtime services provide a similar
>> > interface to the UEFI runtime support and allow to call in
Hi Thiago,
> So even if not ideal, the solution above is desirable for powerpc. We would
> like to preserve the ability of allowing userspace to pass parameters to the
> OS via the DTB, even if secure boot is enabled.
>
> I would like to turn the above into a proposal:
>
> Extend the syscall a
Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 18:03:35 schrieb Thiago Jung Bauermann:
> Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 22:26:09 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > However, the powerpc specific RTAS runtime services provide a similar
> > interface to the UEFI runtime support and allow to call into
> > binary code from the kernel, w
Am Mittwoch, 20 Juli 2016, 13:12:20 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 8:47:45 PM CEST Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > At least for stdout-path, I can't really see how that would
> > significantly help an attacker, but I'm all ears if anyone has ideas.
>
> That's actually an easy one
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:35:30AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 01:45:42PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > IOW, if your kernel forced signature verification, you should not be
> > > able to do sig_enforce=0. If you kernel did not have
> > > CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FOR
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 01:45:42PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >
> > Command line options are not signed. I thought idea behind secureboot
> > was to execute only trusted code and command line options don't enforce
> > you to execute unsigned code.
> >
> >>
> >> You can set
On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 8:47:45 PM CEST Michael Ellerman wrote:
> At least for stdout-path, I can't really see how that would significantly help
> an attacker, but I'm all ears if anyone has ideas.
That's actually an easy one that came up before: If an attacker controls
a tty device (e.g. netw
Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 01:45:42PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> > IOW, if your kernel forced signature verification, you should not be
>> > able to do sig_enforce=0. If you kernel did not have
>> > CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE=y, then sig_enforce should be 0 by defa
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 01:45:42PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > IOW, if your kernel forced signature verification, you should not be
> > able to do sig_enforce=0. If you kernel did not have
> > CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE=y, then sig_enforce should be 0 by default anyway
> > and you are not making it
>
> Command line options are not signed. I thought idea behind secureboot
> was to execute only trusted code and command line options don't enforce
> you to execute unsigned code.
>
>>
>> You can set module.sig_enforce=0 and open up the system a bit assuming
>> that you can
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 09:26:29AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 10:46:04PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-07-13 at 14:22 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 06:40:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 201
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 10:46:04PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-07-13 at 14:22 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 06:40:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:03:38AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul
On Wed, 2016-07-13 at 14:22 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 06:40:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:03:38AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:26:39AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > >
> >
Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 22:26:09 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Friday, July 15, 2016 2:42:10 PM CEST Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On other architectures, DT can also contain open-firmware "functions"
> > but I don't think there's much support in the kernel for that - maybe
> > the PPC folk c
On Friday, July 15, 2016 2:42:10 PM CEST Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
> On other architectures, DT can also contain open-firmware "functions"
> but I don't think there's much support in the kernel for that - maybe
> the PPC folk can reply on that point.
The open firmware runtime interface ar
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:29:09PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 14:33:47 schrieb Mark Rutland:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:26:10AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > I don't know anything about DTB. So here comes a very basic question.
> > > Does DTB allow passing
Am Freitag, 15 Juli 2016, 14:33:47 schrieb Mark Rutland:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:26:10AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:31:02AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:44:14 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann
wrote:
> > > > Am Donnerstag, 14 Juli 2
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:26:10AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:31:02AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I think that helps, as it makes the problem space correspond to that
> > of modifying the command line, but I can still come up with countless
> > attacks based on modif
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:26:10AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:31:02AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:44:14 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, 14 Juli 2016, 10:29:11 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> >
> > > >
> > > > Right,
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:31:02AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:44:14 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 14 Juli 2016, 10:29:11 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
>
> > >
> > > Right, but the question remains whether this helps while you allow the
> > > boo
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:49:25AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 03:13:42PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:41:28 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > The big question is whether this is a realistic case on a secure boot
> > > system.
>
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 03:13:42PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:41:28 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> > The big question is whether this is a realistic case on a secure boot
> > system.
>
> What does x86 do here? I assume changes to the command line are also
> limited
On Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:44:14 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 14 Juli 2016, 10:29:11 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> >
> > Right, but the question remains whether this helps while you allow the
> > boot loader to modify the dtb. If an attacker gets in and cannot modify
> > th
Am Donnerstag, 14 Juli 2016, 10:29:11 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 11:18:04 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 21:59:18 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 3:45:41 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann
wrote:
> > > > Am Mittwoch
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:57:28PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 6:58:32 PM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> >
> > > we may want to remove unnecessary devices and even add a dedicated
> > > storage device for storing a core dump image.
> >
> > I suspect that bringing up
On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 11:18:04 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 21:59:18 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 3:45:41 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > > Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 15:13:42 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > >
> > > For secur
Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 21:59:18 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 3:45:41 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 15:13:42 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:41:28 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at
On 07/14/16 at 02:38am, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> Apologies for the slow response. I'm attending LinuxCon this week.
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:34:47AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:36:14AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > > But consider we can kexec to a different kerne
On 07/13/16 at 10:34am, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:36:14AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > But consider we can kexec to a different kernel and a different initrd so
> > there
> > will be use cases to pass a total different dtb as well.
>
> It depends on what you mean by "a diff
On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 3:45:41 PM CEST Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 15:13:42 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:41:28 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:01:33AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > - kboot/petitboot w
On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 6:58:32 PM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> > we may want to remove unnecessary devices and even add a dedicated
> > storage device for storing a core dump image.
>
> I suspect that bringing up a minimal number of devices is better
> controlled by a cmdline option. In
Am Mittwoch, 13 Juli 2016, 15:13:42 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:41:28 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:01:33AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > - kboot/petitboot with all of the user space being part of the trusted
> > > boot> >
> > > chain:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 06:40:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:03:38AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:26:39AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > Indeed - maybe Eric knows better, but I can't see any situation where
> > > th
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 02:38:06AM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> Apologies for the slow response. I'm attending LinuxCon this week.
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:34:47AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:36:14AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > > But consider we can kexec to
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:03:38AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:26:39AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > Indeed - maybe Eric knows better, but I can't see any situation where
> > the dtb we load via kexec should ever affect "the bootloader", unless
> > the "kerne
Apologies for the slow response. I'm attending LinuxCon this week.
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:34:47AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:36:14AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > But consider we can kexec to a different kernel and a different initrd so
> > there
> > will be use ca
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:45:22AM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> Vivek Goyal writes:
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:09AM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> >> Hello Eric,
> >>
> >> Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> >> > AKASHI Takahiro writes:
> >> > > Device
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:41:39AM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> Petr Tesarik writes:
> > On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:25:11 -0300
> > Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Eric,
> >>
> >> I'm trying to understand your concerns leading to your nack. I hope you
> >> don't mind expanding your though
On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:41:28 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:01:33AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:36:14 AM CEST Dave Young wrote:
> > > On 07/12/16 at 03:50pm, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:24:10PM +0200, Ar
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:26:39AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 05:55:33PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> > Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> > >> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> > >> > On
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:01:33AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:36:14 AM CEST Dave Young wrote:
> > On 07/12/16 at 03:50pm, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:24:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:18:11 AM CEST Viv
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:36:14AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> But consider we can kexec to a different kernel and a different initrd so
> there
> will be use cases to pass a total different dtb as well.
It depends on what you mean by "a different kernel", and what this
implies for the DTB.
I exp
On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 09:26:39 +0100
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 05:55:33PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> > Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> > >> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> > >> > On Tue,
[snip]
> Now, going back to the more fundamental issue raised in my first reply,
> about the kernel command line.
>
> On x86, I can see that it _is_ possible for userspace to specify a
> command line, and the kernel loading the image provides the command
> line to the to-be-kexeced kernel with ver
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 05:55:33PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> >> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> >> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> >> >> I'm not an expert
Arnd Bergmann writes:
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:36:14 AM CEST Dave Young wrote:
>> On 07/12/16 at 03:50pm, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:24:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > > On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:18:11 AM CEST Vivek Goyal wrote:
>> >
>> > /proc/devicetree
Ard Biesheuvel writes:
> On 13 July 2016 at 09:36, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
>>> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
>>> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>>> >> I'm not an expert on DTB, so I ca
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:47:56AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 13 July 2016 at 09:36, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> >> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> >> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrot
On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:36:14 AM CEST Dave Young wrote:
> On 07/12/16 at 03:50pm, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:24:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:18:11 AM CEST Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >
> > /proc/devicetree (aka /sys/firmware/devicetree
Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
>> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
>> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>> >> I'm not an expert on DTB, so I can't provide an example of code
>> >> execution, but you h
On 13 July 2016 at 09:36, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
>> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
>> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>> >> I'm not an expert on DTB, so I can't provide an example of code
>
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:59:51PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> >> I'm not an expert on DTB, so I can't provide an example of code
> >> execution, but you have already mentioned the /chosen/linux,
Russell King - ARM Linux writes:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>> I'm not an expert on DTB, so I can't provide an example of code
>> execution, but you have already mentioned the /chosen/linux,stdout-path
>> property. If an attacker redirects the bootloader to an
On 07/12/16 at 03:50pm, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:24:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:18:11 AM CEST Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Open Firmware, the DT is extracted from running firmware and copied
> > > > into dynamically allocated d
Vivek Goyal writes:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:09AM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>> Hello Eric,
>>
>> Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
>> > AKASHI Takahiro writes:
>> > > Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
>> > > archs, lik
Petr Tesarik writes:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:25:11 -0300
> Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> I'm trying to understand your concerns leading to your nack. I hope you
>> don't mind expanding your thoughts on them a bit.
>>
>> Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Bi
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:05PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> I'm not an expert on DTB, so I can't provide an example of code
> execution, but you have already mentioned the /chosen/linux,stdout-path
> property. If an attacker redirects the bootloader to an insecure
> console, they may get access
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:22:07 -0500
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Petr Tesarik writes:
>
> > On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:25:11 -0300
> > Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>[...]
> >> I also don't understand what you mean by code execution. How does passing
> >> a
> >> device tree bl
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes:
> Petr Tesarik writes:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:25:11 -0300
>> Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to understand your concerns leading to your nack. I hope you
>>> don't mind expanding your thoughts on them a bit.
Petr Tesarik writes:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:25:11 -0300
> Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> I'm trying to understand your concerns leading to your nack. I hope you
>> don't mind expanding your thoughts on them a bit.
>>
>> Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. B
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:25:11 -0300
Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> I'm trying to understand your concerns leading to your nack. I hope you
> don't mind expanding your thoughts on them a bit.
>
> Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> > AKASHI Takahiro wri
Hi Eric,
I'm trying to understand your concerns leading to your nack. I hope you
don't mind expanding your thoughts on them a bit.
Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> AKASHI Takahiro writes:
> > Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
> > a
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:24:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:18:11 AM CEST Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > >
> > > On Open Firmware, the DT is extracted from running firmware and copied
> > > into dynamically allocated data structures. After a kexec, the runtime
> > > inter
On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:18:11 AM CEST Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >
> > On Open Firmware, the DT is extracted from running firmware and copied
> > into dynamically allocated data structures. After a kexec, the runtime
> > interface to the firmware is not available, so the flattened DT format
> > was
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:02:46PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 8:25:48 AM CEST Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > AKASHI Takahiro writes:
> >
> > > Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
> > > archs, like powerpc and arm64, but the current kernel i
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58:09AM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Hello Eric,
>
> Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> > AKASHI Takahiro writes:
> > > Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
> > > archs, like powerpc and arm64, but the
AKASHI Takahiro writes:
> Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
> archs, like powerpc and arm64, but the current kernel interface
> lacks this support.
>
> This patch extends kexec_file_load system call by adding an extra
> argument to this syscall so that an arbitr
On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 8:25:48 AM CEST Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> AKASHI Takahiro writes:
>
> > Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
> > archs, like powerpc and arm64, but the current kernel interface
> > lacks this support.
> >
> > This patch extends kexec_file
Hello Eric,
Am Dienstag, 12 Juli 2016, 08:25:48 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> AKASHI Takahiro writes:
> > Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
> > archs, like powerpc and arm64, but the current kernel interface
> > lacks this support.
> >
> > This patch extends kexec_
Device tree blob must be passed to a second kernel on DTB-capable
archs, like powerpc and arm64, but the current kernel interface
lacks this support.
This patch extends kexec_file_load system call by adding an extra
argument to this syscall so that an arbitrary number of file descriptors
can be
71 matches
Mail list logo