linux-kernel - Re: [REGRESSION] Suspend fails because of TPM modules

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1011291625120.981@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:26:19 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Rajiv Andrade <srajiv@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Debora Velarde <debora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Marcel Selhorst <m.selhorst@...rix.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...e.com>, jmorris@...ei.org,
	mjg@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] Suspend fails because of TPM modules

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Rajiv Andrade wrote:

> > > on my thinkpad x200s (and I have seen reports on different HW as well),
> > > suspend fails when TPM modules are loaded.
> > > 
> > > 	tpm_tis 00:0a: tpm_transmit: tpm_send: error -5
> > > 	legacy_suspend(): pnp_bus_suspend+0x0/0xa0 returns -5
> > > 	PM: Device 00:0a failed to suspend: error -5
> > > 	PM: Some devices failed to suspend
> > > 
> > > Once tpm, tpm_bios, tpm_tis and tpm modules are unloaded, suspend/resume
> > > works.
> > > 
> > > This is a regression. It definitely worked on this very same hardware on
> > > 2.6.34. Any kernel between .34 and .37 wasn't booted there, so I don't
> > > have any data of that kind.
> > > 
> > > I can try bisecting it, but if anyone sees immediately what the culprit
> > > might be, that'd be helpful.
> > I just found out, that if I modprobe tpm_tis module with
> > 
> > 	itpm=1
> > 
> > parameter, the problem doesn't happen any more and suspend works fine.
> > 
> > This definitely wasn't needed on older kernels though, so I'd consider
> > that still a regression.
> > 
> > Also, can't we make the module automatically detect the machines on which
> > to apply the workaround? Let's say, based on DMI?
> > 
> There's a patch already submitted that solves this:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128769741101534&w=2
> <http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128769741101534&w=2>
> 
> This side effect (to solve the suspend issue) should increase its urgency I
> think.
> James, any thoughts?

Yeah, Matthew has already pointed me to that patch, thanks. I will be 
testing it shortly and providing my Tested-by: eventually.

Any ideas why other kernels were OK (.34) and didn't require this quirk on 
my machine at all?

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
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/