Comment 33 for bug 1903288

------- Comment From <email address hidden> 2021-10-14 11:12 EDT-------
(In reply to comment #40)
> Hi Nayna,
>
> I agree that Reviewed-by or Tested-by are in general helpful, but these tags
> follow strict rules in Linux kernel (see: "Reviewer's statement of
> oversight" in kernel documentation). I cannot provide such tags without
> performing review or testing. Unfortunately I cannot do the review because
> it is not an area of my expertise. About testing - I simply cannot test it.

Thanks Krzysztof for your response. Of course, you should give Reviewed-by and Tested-by only if you actually do it.

Sorry, if I assumed the details here. When I asked for the tags, what I meant was that if someone from Canonical can actually review and test the patch and then send their Reviewed-By, Tested-by. Sorry for the misunderstanding and I hope it is clarified now.

In case it helps, I guess it should be possible to test it on any x86/Power system by embedding your own generated key in .platform keyring using this patch and ensure verified kexec on secure boot enabled system.

>
> Instead, you or your colleagues should engage in discussions with
> open-source upstream community and resolve the kbuild reported bugs and
> address raised concerns (about missing use-case). None of additional tags
> would help in avoiding doing it.
>

v3 version of the patch has addressed all the concerns which are raised till now.

https://<email address hidden>/

Thanks & Regards,
- Nayna