mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
To: "kas@kernel.org" <kas@kernel.org>,
	"ardb@kernel.org" <ardb@kernel.org>,
	"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Move memory acceptance x86 arch code into EFI stub
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 23:52:35 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <33dcb4c259dc5ce35dea3be3e4ac67d88c58279f.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0fce97e4-3c3d-4b25-aa50-b88a003fd033@app.fastmail.com>

On Fri, 2026-09-18 at 01:19 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The memory acceptance occurs after ExitBootServices(), and so there is little the
> EFI stub can do at this point except maybe set a variable with an error message
> and reset the system. If that is better than a panic(), this is something we can
> consider.
> 
> However, I'd like to avoid going off into the weeds here with something that was
> intended to simply move some logic from one place to the other. The current code
> prints an error to the UART I/O port (rather than the PV console TDX uses when
> running in the decompressor) and then loops forever. Is that something we could
> retain for this series, and then continue the above discussion in the context of
> a separate series based on top of that?

Uhh, yea. I guess I don't see a strong reason. This definitely has some aspects
unrelated to removing panic() from that EFI stub. I thought we might find an
alternative simpler solution quickly.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-17 23:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-14 18:37 Ard Biesheuvel
2026-09-14 18:37 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/tdx: Share tdx_panic() with the " Ard Biesheuvel
2026-09-15  0:02   ` Borislav Petkov
2026-09-15  3:11   ` Borislav Petkov
2026-09-16  7:05     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2026-09-14 18:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/boot: Move unaccepted memory handling out of the decompressor Ard Biesheuvel
2026-09-14 18:37 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86/boot: Drop unused implementation of panic() Ard Biesheuvel
2026-09-14 23:26 ` [PATCH 0/3] Move memory acceptance x86 arch code into EFI stub Borislav Petkov
2026-09-16 18:16 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-09-17 13:32   ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-09-17 18:29     ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-09-17 23:19       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2026-09-17 23:52         ` Edgecombe, Rick P [this message]
2026-09-18  2:12       ` Yan Zhao
2026-09-18  5:28         ` Yan Zhao
2026-09-18 10:45           ` Kiryl Shutsemau

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=33dcb4c259dc5ce35dea3be3e4ac67d88c58279f.camel@intel.com \
    --to=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=kas@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®