Comment 5 for bug 1971027
Revision history for this message
| Andrea Righi (arighi) wrote Re: [SPR] Need length parsing in TDX attestation driver | #5 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
Some comments after a quick review:
1) Patches are missing an upstream reference (link, git repo, etc.)? In this way we can verify if patches have been posted upstream, if they've got a review, etc. (this is not critical, because I see that a link to the upstream thread has been posted in comment #1, so the link can be added when the patches are applied)
2) Is there a dependency between this patch set and the other TDX-related patch set? (https:/
3) As I mentioned in the other LP tracker (1971028) also this patch set seems to be still in a development state, especially reading some comments in the upstream thread it looks like the kernel ABI isn't still defined yet (e.g., discussion about using ioctl() vs sysfs interface), or core implementation details, like using DMA vs CMA vs swiotlb memory for allocations). Usually we tend to accept patches that have been already "approved" upstream (merged in a git repository or at least ACK-ed completely, so they're not subject to big changes or big refactoring, especially in the kernel ABI.