[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180110160823.4jco3foc4afxbtl2@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:08:23 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Alexander Steffen <Alexander.Steffen@...ineon.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] tpmdd updates for v4.16
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:59:07AM +0100, Alexander Steffen wrote:
> On 08.01.2018 12:18, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > Hi James,
> >
> > Sorry for a late PR.
> >
> > Summary of the content:
> >
> > * Reduced polling delays in tpm_tis.
> > * Support for retrieving TPM 2.0 Event Log through EFI before
> > ExitBootServices.
> > * Replaced tpm-rng.c with a hwrng device managed by the driver for each
> > TPM device.
> > * TPM resource manager synthesizes TPM_RC_COMMAND_CODE response instead
> > of returning -EINVAL for unknown TPM commands. This makes user space
> > more sound.
> > * CLKRUN fixes:
> > * Keep #CLKRUN disable through the entier TPM command/response flow.
> > * Check whether #CLKRUN is enabled before disabling and enabling it
> > again because enabling it breaks PS/2 devices on a system where it
> > is disabled.
>
> I just spent some time trying to run all that (tpmdd-next-20180108) through
> my test system and hit a couple of non-TPM problems. In case you see similar
> issues, this is what I found out:
>
> 1. rmmod for the TPM driver hangs indefinitely. The TPM driver now registers
> itself as a hwrng, but in case it is the only hwrng in a system, the call to
> hwrng_unregister never returns. Known bug, but still not fixed in 4.15-rc7
> (see https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org/msg29884.html
> for details).
>
> 2. Raspberry Pis (which I use to test tpm_tis_spi and
> tpm_i2c_infineon) boot with that kernel, but have no USB or ethernet
> support. Also a known problem
> (http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2018-January/552280.html).
>
> 3. Device tree overlays with references to non-existent target-paths are
> rejected now (whereas before the invalid parts were just ignored). I guess
> this is an intentional change, but the error message does not really point
> to the problem (applying the overlay just returns with EINVAL).
Do we have these?
> With all that fixed in my environment, my tests now pass successfully.
>
> Alexander
Thank you for reporting these issues.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists