From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF11C35247 for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 23:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A74DC21775 for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 23:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="m0BHB8BW" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726509AbgBFXoR (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Feb 2020 18:44:17 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:36456 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726502AbgBFXoR (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Feb 2020 18:44:17 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id z3so528232wru.3 for ; Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:44:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d02kj/Sz33fa+befgXZVyFREBr0vJnFUZeMKa31YhvU=; b=m0BHB8BWirguKwZ62oJ9sCeWiNk4ZMjTSxggAILO04O6yhuLcNQpLniOi4JGJ4UJYv XAGdqJxP3BJbWUPQmnoBeHwmH/sbn/bXHj+8NFbDkzfZRgt30L3uLME77sKc3GjEa+kv PBU6gqQXEc+1vBY3kv10MJlk1JrcWKE4Q/VsPMzLoBWjE4ozmf8jcNsqn/wVC9PNFn38 qpvoKl653a+mB4e1T32mXBtUCX+LtENNUatP9IEME69ISo/LqbTSq2ESV2x7/GhXZQhv HmI3jO7GhCTaR9DNfUNSQt/0WU4tPpx3NasR1R4x1vdLbIeQO3gFDKnu3jAUyy1uB87E HwQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d02kj/Sz33fa+befgXZVyFREBr0vJnFUZeMKa31YhvU=; b=i+AqVYB41dKxrZgdzh64gXic2k3xiGbnx50CKI2qq/2E8cD8ka1h+3ZnHPno/6y2pr QRNk7R+Bpw9YzpLpvA/JJ2Ms+zklCkW1pt7uTo7m7vZ1SXyZYkTzCq1g1Ia1EKyS0k4g QE7CW15jn5YbipVR+6Y5ccSC+A9+518pUDpYQHliukHeOuuZmfzlyECxj9RGviFxmdP3 tlv8rydarvkwMratorwkjeNl480oF/E4SpeRRKoZqczB0Qg+zjl1S6Luho+85LS1Xq7Y bf6FV8L9oRR+xBux3fwfzmqMQWX+rwfOD2RBx/XavcoNNeuYxu+UKpyj/iHEnqkB2zGs HxvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXpvcAziwTK302ZE9VYVfCDJqVUh9hcZ252H+l92lo7AedVBS7U CJPJp2bn9NqC+M7gCK9jjLTTqQO6/e6lnD35afnt1A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxpArkCAj89URKq3zHxyBge3u7GNKCttPWI1urPSnesFArTXUqzR/IIYDcODxWqpNQ9cYV4fjYwH+o67pLFahQ= X-Received: by 2002:adf:8564:: with SMTP id 91mr518010wrh.252.1581032655972; Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:44:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200206140352.6300-1-ardb@kernel.org> <20200206140352.6300-3-ardb@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 23:44:04 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] efi/libstub: take noinitrd cmdline argument into account for devpath initrd To: Heinrich Schuchardt Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , linux-efi , linux-arm-kernel , Laszlo Ersek , Leif Lindholm , Peter Jones , Matthew Garrett , Alexander Graf , Ilias Apalodimas , Daniel Kiper Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-efi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 18:33, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > On 2/6/20 3:03 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > One of the advantages of using what basically amounts to a callback > > interface into the bootloader for loading the initrd is that it provides > > a natural place for the bootloader or firmware to measure the initrd > > contents while they are being passed to the kernel. > > > > Unfortunately, this is not a guarantee that the initrd will in fact be > > loaded and its /init invoked by the kernel, since the command line may > > contain the 'noinitrd' option, in which case the initrd is ignored, but > > this will not be reflected in the PCR that covers the initrd measurement. > > Does PCR here refer to the TPM Platform Configuration Register? > Yes.