linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm: Move Linux RNG connection to hwrng

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: <20171025200030.ikygzc3lxnwex7sg@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2017 22:00:30 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
Cc:     PrasannaKumar Muralidharan <prasannatsmkumar@...il.com>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        "open list:KEYS-TRUSTED" <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE" 
        <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
        Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
        David Safford <safford@...ibm.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Move Linux RNG connection to hwrng

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 01:37:07PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 08:58:17PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 08:15:09PM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote:
> > > > +       if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TPM))
> > > > +               return 0;
> > > 
> > > Can #ifndef CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TPM be used instead? That way an if
> > > condition can be avoided.
> > 
> > Nope. There is no reason to avoid the if-condition. Compiler will take
> > care of it. IS_ENABLED() macro is available just for the purpose Jason
> > is using it.
> > 
> > > > +       char tpm_hwrng_name[64];
> > > > +       struct hwrng tpm_hwrng;
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > Can this also be put inside the #ifdef?
> > 
> > Yes. It should be inside #ifdef.
> 
> Then we need #idefs in the .c code, IS_ENABLED is not enough :\ I
> don't think the few bytes matters enough to bother.
> 
> Jason

I'll buy that!

A minor tidbit: could the tpm_ prefix removed from those fields?

/Jarkko