linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v9 16/17] tpm: take TPM chip power gating out of 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9DA230D9@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Nov 2018 13:17:56 +0000
From:   "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     "linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        "Struk, Tadeusz" <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Nayna Jain" <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        "Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@...pe.ca>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v9 16/17] tpm: take TPM chip power gating out of
 tpm_transmit()


> 
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 10:52:46PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > This is still NACK from my side
> 
> Last time you spoke about tboot intervention but I don't see why as even
> sending a single command is not atomic in the true sense of the word i.e. if
> there was a problem that would already affect the existing code and would
> essentially mean that tboot itself is broken.
So I've consulted the issue, I wasn't not correct in the description. Tboot cannot acquire  the locality, unless the host driver relinquish it,
so the issue is opposite, driver is expected to relinquish the locality for tboot to work correctly. This is current status, other behavior will need a different implementation on both sides. 

Hopes that clears the question.

Thanks