linux-kernel - Re: Regression in suspend-to-ram (TPM related) with 5.1-rc1 (BISECTED)

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: <20190321134140.GA4603@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:41:40 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Paul Zimmerman <pauldzim@...il.com>
Cc:     Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regression in suspend-to-ram (TPM related) with 5.1-rc1
 (BISECTED)

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 04:03:37PM -0700, Paul Zimmerman wrote:
> So I bisected this down to:
> 
> # first bad commit: [a3fbfae82b4cb3ff9928e29f34c64d0507cad874] tpm:
> take TPM chip power gating out of tpm_transmit()
> 
> but this doesn't revert cleanly on Linus' HEAD. Anyone have an idea what
> could be wrong here?

Sorry I've been in flu for the early week. I spotted the bug
immediately.  When I did these patches I did not have TPM 1.x at my
hand. I used fTPM 2.0 and dTPM 2.0. Stefan did TPM 1.x testing but I
probably forgot to ask him to try out suspend.

Anyway, the bug is obvious and I'll send you a patch to try out.
Thanks a lot for bisecting this!

/Jarkko