[ Enquiring the progress of KylinSoft CGL 5.0 Registration] On 21.02.21 (Sun 16:00) celine ksos wrote: > Dear CGL workgroup, > > I sent our CGL 5.0 registration files to you on December 17，2020. > > I'd really appreciate it if you could tell me the registration progress. > > Please feel free to contact me at any time. > > Regards, > Celine > Software Engineer > Server R&D Department > KylinSoft Co., Ltd. Hi Celine, Please accept my sincere apologies for the delay in responding to yours and the other CGL registrations. With regard to your registration, there are a few minor questions: * SMM.7.1 - SMM.7.3: These are generally implemented via OpenIPMI. As you already have OpenIPMI listed in your disclosure document elsewhere, I recommend you simply switch the disclosure here for the more commonly-supported utility. It shouldn't require any work on your part other than updating the document. * SFA.2.1: Live Kernel Remote Debugger Here you indicate you are implementing the feature with 'gdb'. Typically this has been implemented with either 'kgdb' or a proprietary solution in other registrations. Are you confident you can do live kernel debugging with the version of gdb provided with your product? * SFA.2.2: Dynamic Probe Insertion This is typically implemented with either kprobes and/or LTTng. Your disclosure indicates it is a feature of your mainline kernel. Are you confident the version of the kernel you are shipping supports the features listed in this requirement? Other than that, everything appears fine as it is, though the review has turned up a few minor things you may wish to amend in your disclosure documents: * AVL.13.1: Parallel User Initialization During Startup This has been implemented by sysvinit and systemd both from different approved registrations. Currently your disclosures indicate you do not provide this feature. If you would like to claim support for this requirement, you certainly can. * PRF.1.7: Handling Interrupts As Threads This has been a feature in RT kernels for a very long time, if you are supporting a RT Linux kernel, you can claim support for this requirement. * SEC.9.2: Advanced Role-Based Access Control Since you already have a reference policy based SELinux implementation in your product and that policy will be able to support advanced RBAC features, you may claim support for this requirement if you like. Of course if this is a feature you do not actively support in your product it is entirely reasonable to leave this claim as it is. -- -Joe MacDonald (on behalf of the CGL Workgroup). :wq
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Lf_carrier mailing list Lf_carrier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lf_carrier
