| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 20:10:26 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>, Ashley Lai <ashley@...leylai.com>,
Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@...horst.net>,
christophe.ricard@...il.com, josh.triplett@...el.com,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Will Arthur <will.c.arthur@...el.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
jason.gunthorpe@...idianresearch.com,
trousers-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v7 09/10] tpm: TPM 2.0 FIFO Interface
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 04:52:07PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> On 11/11/2014 08:45 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >From: Will Arthur <will.c.arthur@...el.com>
> >
> >Detect TPM 2.0 by using the extended STS (STS3) register. For TPM 2.0,
> >instead of calling tpm_get_timeouts(), assign duration and timeout
> >values defined in the TPM 2.0 PTP specification.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Will Arthur <will.c.arthur@...el.com>
> >Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
> >---
> > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
> >index 7a2c59b..0b3c089 100644
> >--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
> >+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
> >@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> > /*
> > * Copyright (C) 2005, 2006 IBM Corporation
> >+ * Copyright (C) 2014 Intel Corporation
> > *
> > * Authors:
> > * Leendert van Doorn <leendert@...son.ibm.com>
> >@@ -44,6 +45,10 @@ enum tis_status {
> > TPM_STS_DATA_EXPECT = 0x08,
> > };
> >
> >+enum tis_status3 {
> >+ TPM_STS3_TPM2_FAM = 0x04,
> >+};
> >+
> > enum tis_int_flags {
> > TPM_GLOBAL_INT_ENABLE = 0x80000000,
> > TPM_INTF_BURST_COUNT_STATIC = 0x100,
> >@@ -70,6 +75,7 @@ enum tis_defaults {
> > #define TPM_INT_STATUS(l) (0x0010 | ((l) << 12))
> > #define TPM_INTF_CAPS(l) (0x0014 | ((l) << 12))
> > #define TPM_STS(l) (0x0018 | ((l) << 12))
> >+#define TPM_STS3(l) (0x001b | ((l) << 12))
> > #define TPM_DATA_FIFO(l) (0x0024 | ((l) << 12))
> >
> > #define TPM_DID_VID(l) (0x0F00 | ((l) << 12))
> >@@ -344,6 +350,7 @@ static int tpm_tis_send(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
> > {
> > int rc;
> > u32 ordinal;
> >+ unsigned long dur;
> >
> > rc = tpm_tis_send_data(chip, buf, len);
> > if (rc < 0)
> >@@ -355,9 +362,14 @@ static int tpm_tis_send(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
> >
> > if (chip->vendor.irq) {
> > ordinal = be32_to_cpu(*((__be32 *) (buf + 6)));
> >+
> >+ if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2)
> >+ dur = tpm_calc_ordinal_duration(chip, ordinal);
> >+ else
> >+ dur = tpm_calc_ordinal_duration(chip, ordinal);
> >+
>
> Is this right? Shouldn't you call tpm2_calc_ordinal_duration for TPM2? If
> not don't check the flag but leave comment for why the same function can be
> called for both TPM versions.
No it's not right, it's a mistake. Thanks for noticing this :)
> > if (wait_for_tpm_stat
> >- (chip, TPM_STS_DATA_AVAIL | TPM_STS_VALID,
> >- tpm_calc_ordinal_duration(chip, ordinal),
> >+ (chip, TPM_STS_DATA_AVAIL | TPM_STS_VALID, dur,
> > &chip->vendor.read_queue, false) < 0) {
> > rc = -ETIME;
> > goto out_err;
> >@@ -543,6 +555,7 @@ static int tpm_tis_init(struct device *dev, acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle,
> > u32 vendor, intfcaps, intmask;
> > int rc, i, irq_s, irq_e, probe;
> > struct tpm_chip *chip;
> >+ u8 sts3;
> >
> > chip = tpmm_chip_alloc(dev, &tpm_tis);
> > if (IS_ERR(chip))
> >@@ -554,11 +567,28 @@ static int tpm_tis_init(struct device *dev, acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle,
> > if (!chip->vendor.iobase)
> > return -EIO;
> >
> >+ sts3 = ioread8(chip->vendor.iobase + TPM_STS3(1));
> >+ if (sts3 & TPM_STS3_TPM2_FAM)
> >+ chip->flags = TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2;
> >+
> > /* Default timeouts */
> >- chip->vendor.timeout_a = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
> >- chip->vendor.timeout_b = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_LONG_TIMEOUT);
> >- chip->vendor.timeout_c = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
> >- chip->vendor.timeout_d = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
> >+ if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) {
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_a = usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_TIMEOUT_A);
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_b = usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_TIMEOUT_B);
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_c = usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_TIMEOUT_C);
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_d = usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_TIMEOUT_D);
> >+ chip->vendor.duration[TPM_SHORT] =
> >+ usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_DURATION_SHORT);
> >+ chip->vendor.duration[TPM_MEDIUM] =
> >+ usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_DURATION_MEDIUM);
> >+ chip->vendor.duration[TPM_LONG] =
> >+ usecs_to_jiffies(TPM2_DURATION_LONG);
> >+ } else {
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_a = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_b = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_LONG_TIMEOUT);
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_c = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
> >+ chip->vendor.timeout_d = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
> >+ }
> >
> > if (wait_startup(chip, 0) != 0) {
> > rc = -ENODEV;
> >@@ -573,8 +603,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_init(struct device *dev, acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle,
> > vendor = ioread32(chip->vendor.iobase + TPM_DID_VID(0));
> > chip->vendor.manufacturer_id = vendor;
> >
> >- dev_info(dev,
> >- "1.2 TPM (device-id 0x%X, rev-id %d)\n",
> >+ dev_info(dev, "%s TPM (device-id 0x%X, rev-id %d)\n",
> >+ (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) ? "2.0" : "1.2",
> > vendor >> 16, ioread8(chip->vendor.iobase + TPM_RID(0)));
> >
> > if (!itpm) {
> >@@ -616,13 +646,17 @@ static int tpm_tis_init(struct device *dev, acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle,
> > dev_dbg(dev, "\tData Avail Int Support\n");
> >
> > /* get the timeouts before testing for irqs */
> >- if (tpm_get_timeouts(chip)) {
> >+ if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) && tpm_get_timeouts(chip)) {
> > dev_err(dev, "Could not get TPM timeouts and durations\n");
> > rc = -ENODEV;
> > goto out_err;
> > }
> >
> >- if (tpm_do_selftest(chip)) {
> >+ if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2)
> >+ rc = tpm2_do_selftest(chip);
> >+ else
> >+ rc = tpm_do_selftest(chip);
> >+ if (rc) {
> > dev_err(dev, "TPM self test failed\n");
> > rc = -ENODEV;
> > goto out_err;
> >@@ -683,7 +717,10 @@ static int tpm_tis_init(struct device *dev, acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle,
> > chip->vendor.probed_irq = 0;
> >
> > /* Generate Interrupts */
> >- tpm_gen_interrupt(chip);
> >+ if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2)
> >+ tpm2_gen_interrupt(chip);
> >+ else
> >+ tpm_gen_interrupt(chip);
> >
> > chip->vendor.irq = chip->vendor.probed_irq;
> >
> >@@ -759,14 +796,18 @@ static void tpm_tis_reenable_interrupts(struct tpm_chip *chip)
> > static int tpm_tis_resume(struct device *dev)
> > {
> > struct tpm_chip *chip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> >- int ret;
> >+ int ret = 0;
> >
> > if (chip->vendor.irq)
> > tpm_tis_reenable_interrupts(chip);
> >
> >- ret = tpm_pm_resume(dev);
> >- if (!ret)
> >- tpm_do_selftest(chip);
> >+ if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2)
> >+ tpm2_do_selftest(chip);
> >+ else {
> >+ ret = tpm_pm_resume(dev);
> >+ if (!ret)
> >+ tpm_do_selftest(chip);
> >+ }
>
> Only a self test necessary for TPM2 if resuming from ACPI sleep?
AFAIK firmware/BIOS should do TPM2_Startup according to the rules in the
section 12.2.3.2 of the Architecture specification.
> Other parts look good to me.
> Stefan
/Jarkko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists