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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 7F93CC3A59E for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 19:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E3D922DD3 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 19:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729654AbfHUTMw (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 15:12:52 -0400 Received: from mga18.intel.com ([134.134.136.126]:22807 "EHLO mga18.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729635AbfHUTMw (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 15:12:52 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Aug 2019 12:12:51 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,412,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="178596098" Received: from kumarsh1-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.33.104]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Aug 2019 12:12:43 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 22:12:42 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Sumit Garg Cc: keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, "open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE" , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com, Herbert Xu , davem@davemloft.net, peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, jejb@linux.ibm.com, Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Mimi Zohar , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Casey Schaufler , Ard Biesheuvel , Daniel Thompson , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "tee-dev @ lists . linaro . org" Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT v4 0/5] Add generic trusted keys framework/subsystem Message-ID: <20190821191242.7z3en7om2few4tao@linux.intel.com> References: <1565682784-10234-1-git-send-email-sumit.garg@linaro.org> <20190819165400.xsgpbtbj26y7d2wb@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:16:46AM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > I agree here that 5/5 should go along with TEE patch-set. But if you > look at initial v1 patch-set, the idea was to get feedback on trusted > keys abstraction as a standalone patch along with testing using a TPM > (1.x or 2.0). > > Since Mimi has tested this patch-set with TPM (1.x & 2.0), I am happy > to merge 5/5 with TEE patch-set. But it would be nice if I could get > feedback on 5/5 before I send next version of TEE patch-set. OK, that is understandable. I'll check it out tomorrow. /Jarkko