On 08/22/2016 05:22 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 03:50:22PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Laura Abbott <labbott@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 08/22/2016 01:16 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, John Dulaney <jdulaney@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:28:18PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
The secure boot patches have been around in the Fedora tree for a while
now.
They work well enough but there has not been much active work in getting
them accepted upstream in recent years. The longer they exist out of
tree
the harder they get to maintain without extra support. If there isn't a
path for the current secure boot patch set to be accepted upstream, we
need
to seriously consider if it's worth carrying long term.
Thoughts?
So, how would we handle secure boot moving forward?
How are other distros handling this? Does upstream have an alternative?
There isn't one unified answer. Every distro seems to be doing something
different because upstream hasn't provided a single solution.
Moving forward, we would treat secure boot like feature that is still
in progress. This means taking the existing secure boot patches or
a new approach and submitting them in a way that's acceptable to the
upstream
community. This is also code for "I don't know but what we have isn't
sustainable so let's discuss something better".
Of course.
What patch set are Red Hat and CentOS using? If they're not all using
the same thing is it viable to get them all using the same thing?
They're using the same basic thing, but CentOS 7 and it's grandfather are
based on a 3.10 kernel, so there's a gulf of difference in the codebase of
that and current Fedora kernels, meaning there's no way they're going to
be using exactly the same code. And once it works one particular way in
Red Hat Enterprise Linux, it's unlikely to be swapped out wholesale for
the "new and improved" upstream way until the next major RHEL release.
Enterprise stability and stuff. So yeah, no, you really can't get them all
using the same thing. The kernel codebases are just faaaar too different
for a fairly invasive patchset that touches bits and pieces all over the
place in core areas.
You're right, distros aren't going to swap out what they have in existing
releases for the new hotness. I'd like to believe that if there was a
workable upstream solution many distros would choose to converge on that
for a future release with a corresponding kernel version. Maybe we will
have to maintain some version of these patches for older kernels like
Cent OS but newer kernels could be common.
Thanks,
Laura
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
