On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 06:31:20PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 07:26:05PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 01:18:37PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:14:38PM -0300, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 3:13 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:08:35PM -0300, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > > > All attempts at providing setup_data have been made as an iteration > > > > > > on > > > > > > whatever was there before, stretching back to the original > > > > > > implementation used for DTBs that [mis]used the kernel image itself. > > > > > > We've now had a dozen rounds of bugs and hacks, and the result is > > > > > > turning into a pile of unmaintainable and increasingly brittle > > > > > > hacks. > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's just rip out all the madness and start over. We can > > > > > > re-architect > > > > > > this based on having a separate standalone setup_data file, which > > > > > > is how > > > > > > it should have been done in the first place. This is a larger > > > > > > project > > > > > > with a few things to coordinate, but we can't really begin thinking > > > > > > about that while trying to play whack-a-mole with the current buggy > > > > > > implementation. > > > > > > > > > > > > So this commit removes the setup_data setting from x86_load_linux(), > > > > > > while leaving intact the infrastructure we'll need in the future to > > > > > > try > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > > > > > Cc: Dov Murik <dovmu...@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com> > > > > > > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> > > > > > > Cc: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > > > > > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > > > > > > Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> > > > > > > Cc: H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> > > > > > > Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org> > > > > > > Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nat...@kernel.org> > > > > > > Cc: Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> > > > > > > Cc: Eric Biggers <ebigg...@kernel.org> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <ja...@zx2c4.com> > > > > > > > > > > I think I'll be happier if this is just a revert of > > > > > the relevant commits in reverse order to make life easier > > > > > for backporters. > > > > > Unless that's too much work as we made other changes around > > > > > this code? > > > > > > > > I think that's going to be messy. And it won't handle the dtb stuff > > > > either straightforwardly. > > > > > > List of Fixes tags so people can at least figure out whether they > > > have a version that needs this fix then? > > > > 7.2 is when the functionality started causing problems for most people. > > But the buggy code goes back to 3cbeb524 in 2016. > > We can't rip out the full setup_data support back to that point. That > is deleting significant features that would break -dtb IIUC. For that > we would need to have a deprecation period to announce the incompatibility. > > I was thinking this would only revert the RNG seed pieces which have > negligible user impact.
I'm pretty sure -dtb is used by nobody... Jason
