linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] tpm: reduce tpm_msleep() time in get

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2017 18:44:13 +0530
From:   Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterhuewe@....de,
        tpmdd@...horst.net, jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com,
        patrickc@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] tpm: reduce tpm_msleep() time in get_burstcount()



On 10/12/2017 04:48 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 06:29:23AM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote:
>> Currently, get_burstcount() function sleeps for 5msec in a loop
>> before retrying for next query to burstcount. However, if it takes
>> lesser time for TPM to return, this 5msec delay is longer
>> than necessary.
>>
>> This patch replaces the tpm_msleep time from 5msec to 1msec.
>>
>> After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte
>> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~10sec to ~9sec.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Acked-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> index 224842e06105..826a0b9c9201 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static int get_burstcount(struct tpm_chip *chip)
>>   		burstcnt = (value >> 8) & 0xFFFF;
>>   		if (burstcnt)
>>   			return burstcnt;
>> -		tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
>> +		tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP);
>>   	} while (time_before(jiffies, stop));
>>   	return -EBUSY;
>>   }
>> -- 
>> 2.13.3
>>
> Would it make sense to squash this to 3/5 and merge the commit
> messages?
Yeah.. it sounds reasonable.. both are reducing the sleep delay time for 
same purpose, just in different functions.

Thanks & Regards,
     - Nayna

>
> /Jarkko
>