linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: reduce poll sleep time between send() and recv() in tpm

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: <20180305105633.GE25377@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:56:33 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.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 2/3] tpm: reduce poll sleep time between send() and
 recv() in tpm_transmit()

On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 12:26:35AM +0530, Nayna Jain wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/01/2018 02:52 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 02:18:27PM -0500, Nayna Jain wrote:
> > > In tpm_transmit, after send(), the code checks for status in a loop
> > Maybe cutting hairs now but please just use the actual function name
> > instead of send(). Just makes the commit log more useful asset.
> Sure, will do.
> > 
> > > -		tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
> > > +		tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);
> > What about just calling schedule()?
> I'm not sure what you mean by "schedule()".  Are you suggesting instead of
> using usleep_range(),  using something with an even finer grain construct?
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
>      - Nayna

kernel/sched/core.c

/Jarkko