linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm: select CONFIG

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20170315175809.3ebyzy3r54s6g4nm@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Mar 2017 19:58:09 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@...horst.net>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Christophe Ricard <christophe.ricard@...il.com>,
        Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: select CONFIG_CRYPTO

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:39:16PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > Arnd,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:40:24PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> As we need the CRYPTO_HASH_INFO implementation, we should also
> >> select CRYPTO itself to avoid this build warning:
> >>
> >> warning: (TCG_TPM && TRUSTED_KEYS && IMA) selects CRYPTO_HASH_INFO which has unmet direct dependencies (CRYPTO)
> >>
> >> Fixes: c1f92b4b04ad ("tpm: enhance TPM 2.0 PCR extend to support multiple banks")
> >> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >
> > I've already merged this and put to my next branch.
> 
> Ah, I see my mistake: I had made an identical patch earlier, which you merged
> into linux-next, and I dropped it from my series after rebasing on
> -next, but then
> rebased again on mainline and did the new patch without checking whether
> it was already fixed in -next.
> 
> I guess the warning is rare enough that we don't really need this in v4.11
> even though it does apply there.
> 
>     Arnd

Ah. Right, now that I remember that was my conclusion. I'm sorry that
I did not remember to respond :-) If you think this would make sense
for 4.11 I could send it to stable.

/Jarkko