On 4/21/25 3:57 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 4/21/25 09:27, Ross Philipson wrote:
@@ -788,6 +790,9 @@ static void native_machine_halt(void)
tboot_shutdown(TB_SHUTDOWN_HALT);
+ /* SEXIT done after machine_shutdown() to meet TXT requirements */
+ slaunch_finalize(1);
This is the kind of stuff that needs to get fixed up before this series
can go _anywhere_.
"TXT requirements" is not useful to a maintainer. *WHAT* requirement?
*WHY* must it be done this way?
This code is unmaintainable as it stands.
Sorry we understand the frustration especially for maintainers. We have
gone over your responses so far. We will do whatever it takes to make
this patch set maintainable and acceptable to upstream. I think we are
starting to understand what the main issues are with the set overall
from what you are pointing out.
Thank you for your feedback,
Ross
