linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] tpm: reduce polling time to usecs for even finer granularity

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: <edb61d0d-da8a-5cbd-c21c-80823d587f2a@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 May 2018 09:34:05 -0700
From:   J Freyensee <why2jjj.linux@...il.com>
To:     Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterhuewe@....de,
        jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com, tpmdd@...horst.net,
        jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com, patrickc@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] tpm: reduce polling time to usecs for even finer
 granularity



On 5/7/18 9:07 AM, Nayna Jain wrote:
> The TPM burstcount and status commands are supposed to return very
> quickly [2][3]. This patch further reduces the TPM poll sleep time to usecs
> in get_burstcount() and wait_for_tpm_stat() by calling usleep_range()
> directly.
>
> After this change, performance on a system[1] with a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte
> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~10.7 sec to ~7 sec.
>
> [1] All tests are performed on an x86 based, locked down, single purpose
> closed system. It has Infineon TPM 1.2 using LPC Bus.
>
> [2] From the TCG Specification "TCG PC Client Specific TPM Interface
> Specification (TIS), Family 1.2":
>
> "NOTE : It takes roughly 330 ns per byte transfer on LPC. 256 bytes would
> take 84 us, which is a long time to stall the CPU. Chipsets may not be
> designed to post this much data to LPC; therefore, the CPU itself is
> stalled for much of this time. Sending 1 kB would take 350 μs. Therefore,
> even if the TPM_STS_x.burstCount field is a high value, software SHOULD
> be interruptible during this period."
>
> [3] From the TCG Specification 2.0, "TCG PC Client Platform TPM Profile
> (PTP) Specification":
>
> "It takes roughly 330 ns per byte transfer on LPC. 256 bytes would take
> 84 us. Chipsets may not be designed to post this much data to LPC;
> therefore, the CPU itself is stalled for much of this time. Sending 1 kB
> would take 350 us. Therefore, even if the TPM_STS_x.burstCount field is a
> high value, software should be interruptible during this period. For SPI,
> assuming 20MHz clock and 64-byte transfers, it would take about 120 usec
> to move 256B of data. Sending 1kB would take about 500 usec. If the
> transactions are done using 4 bytes at a time, then it would take about
> 1 msec. to transfer 1kB of data."
>
> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
> ---

Acked-by: Jay Freyensee <why2jjj.linux@...il.com>