[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200622215453.GD22727@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 00:54:53 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: amirmizi6@...il.com
Cc: Eyal.Cohen@...oton.com, oshrialkoby85@...il.com,
alexander.steffen@...ineon.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
peterhuewe@....de, christophe-h.richard@...com, jgg@...pe.ca,
arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, oshri.alkoby@...oton.com,
tmaimon77@...il.com, gcwilson@...ibm.com, kgoldman@...ibm.com,
Dan.Morav@...oton.com, oren.tanami@...oton.com,
shmulik.hager@...oton.com, amir.mizinski@...oton.com,
Benoit Houyere <benoit.houyere@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/8] tpm: tpm_tis: Fix expected bit handling and send
all bytes in one shot without last byte in exception
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 04:43:37PM +0300, amirmizi6@...il.com wrote:
> From: Amir Mizinski <amirmizi6@...il.com>
>
> Detected the following incorrect implementation of the send command:
> polling on the TPM_STS.stsValid field followed by checking the
> TPM_STS.expect field only once. Since TPM_STS.stsValid represents the
> TPM_STS.expect validity, both fields should be polled at the same time.
>
> This fix modifies the signature of wait_for_tpm_stat(), adding an
> additional "mask_result" parameter to its call. wait_for_tpm_stat() is now
> polling the TPM_STS with a mask and waits for the value in mask_result.
> The fix adds the ability to check if certain TPM_STS bits have been
> cleared.
>
> This change is also aligned to verifying the CRC on I2C TPM. The CRC
> verification should be done after the TPM_STS.expect field is cleared
> (TPM received all expected command bytes and set the calculated CRC value
> in the register).
>
> In addition, the send command was changed to comply with
> TCG_DesignPrinciples_TPM2p0Driver_vp24_pubrev.pdf as follows:
> - send all command bytes in one loop
> - remove special handling of the last byte
>
> Suggested-by: Benoit Houyere <benoit.houyere@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Amir Mizinski <amirmizi6@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
If this patch set needs a further update, you could rename the function
as 'tpm_tis_wait_for_stat()' (can be part of this patch). It's better
aligned with other naming and gives better picture of the scope of this
function.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists