linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm: turn on TPM on suspend for TPM 1.x

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 29 Mar 2019 11:41:23 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Domenico Andreoli <domenico.andreoli@...ux.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, pauldzim@...il.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] tpm: turn on TPM on suspend for TPM 1.x

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 06:19:26PM +0100, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:51:20PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > tpm_chip_start/stop() should be also called for TPM 1.x devices on
> > suspend. Add that functionality back. Do not lock the chip because
> > it is unnecessary as there are no multiple threads using it when
> > doing the suspend.
> > 
> > Fixes: a3fbfae82b4c ("tpm: take TPM chip power gating out of tpm_transmit()")
> > Reported-by: Paul Zimmerman <pauldzim@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 14 ++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> > index 83ece5639f86..ae1030c9b086 100644
> > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> > @@ -402,15 +402,13 @@ int tpm_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
> >  	if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_ALWAYS_POWERED)
> >  		return 0;
> >  
> > -	if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) {
> > -		mutex_lock(&chip->tpm_mutex);
> > -		if (!tpm_chip_start(chip)) {
> > +	if (!tpm_chip_start(chip)) {
> > +		if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2)
> >  			tpm2_shutdown(chip, TPM2_SU_STATE);
> > -			tpm_chip_stop(chip);
> > -		}
> > -		mutex_unlock(&chip->tpm_mutex);
> > -	} else {
> > -		rc = tpm1_pm_suspend(chip, tpm_suspend_pcr);
> > +		else
> > +			rc = tpm1_pm_suspend(chip, tpm_suspend_pcr);
> > +
> > +		tpm_chip_stop(chip);
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	return rc;
> 
> Tested-by: Domenico Andreoli <domenico.andreoli@...ux.com>

Thank you! I'll do a PR to James during the weekend.

/Jarkko