linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_crb: Access locality for non-ACPI and non-SMC start method

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]

Date:   Tue, 22 Aug 2017 20:36:49 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jiandi An <anjiandi@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     peterhuewe@....de, tpmdd@...horst.net,
        jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com, tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_crb: Access locality for non-ACPI and non-SMC
 start method

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 10:41:38PM -0500, Jiandi An wrote:
> 
> 
> On 08/19/2017 12:05 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:15:36PM -0500, Jiandi An wrote:
> > > For ARM64, the locality is handled by Trust Zone in FW.
> > > The layout does not have crb_regs_head.  It is hitting
> > > the following line.
> > > dev_warn(dev, FW_BUG "Bad ACPI memory layout");
> > > 
> > > Current code excludes CRB_FL_ACPI_START and when
> > > CRB_FL_CRB_SMC_START is added around the same time
> > > locality support is added, it should also be excluded.
> > > 
> > > For goIdle and cmdReady where code was excluding
> > > CRB_FL_ACPI_START only (do nothing for ACPI start method),
> > > CRB_FL_CRB_SMC_START was also excluded as ARM64 SMC start
> > > method does not have TPM_CRB_CTRL_REQ.
> > > Change if confition to white list instead of black list.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jiandi An <anjiandi@...eaurora.org>
> > 
> > Is this v2? If so, where is the change log?
> Based on the previous comments, I now understand that
> because of Intel PTT bug workaround, it is not appropriate
> for the patch to have title/subject "Access locality for
> only CRB_START method"
> 
> So the more descriptive patch title is "Access locality for
> only non-ACPI and non-SMC start method".  Because the patch
> is changed, I thought I start a new series.  Would you like
> me to tag this v3 and put change log even though patch title
> has changed?
> 
> Thanks
> - Jiandi

I see. Thanks for explaining.

/Jarkko