linux-kernel - Re: Getting weird TPM error after rebasing my tree to security/next-general

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: <20190131184739.GA29056@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:47:40 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        tomas.winkler@...el.com
Subject: Re: Getting weird TPM error after rebasing my tree to
 security/next-general

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 9:06 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Found something that *does* fix the issue. If I replace memcpy_*io()
> > calls with regular memcpy(), the driver works and all my tests pass.
> 
> That's not surprising, since that's what we used to do. And it's
> horribly wrong because "memcpy()" can do things that are horribly
> wrong on IO accesses. Like doing them twice, but alternatively also
> "copy one byte at a time" which generally works, but is horrendously
> slow for IO.

Yup, was just a sanity check.

> Can you check *which* memcpy_*io() triggers the issue? Maybe by
> "bisecting" them (first perhaps on a file-by-file basis, and then
> within a file).

Already did that. See my follow-up.

/Jarkko