linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 3/8] tpm: tpm_tis: Add retry in case of protocol failure or data integrity (on I2C only) failure.

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]

Message-ID: <20200622220208.GF22727@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jun 2020 01:02:08 +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,
        Christophe Ricard <christophe-h.ricard@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 3/8] tpm: tpm_tis: Add retry in case of protocol
 failure or data integrity (on I2C only) failure.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:59:33AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 04:43:38PM +0300, amirmizi6@...il.com wrote:
> > From: Amir Mizinski <amirmizi6@...il.com>
> > 
> > Added a retry mechanism on any protocol error. In addition, a retry is
> > added in case of a data integrity issue in the I2C bus protocol. The check
> > is performed after sending a command to the TPM and after receiving a
> > response from the TPM.
> 
> No chance to merge this without reasoning why on any protocol error we
> should retry. It's not reasoned here. Unfotunately, with this premise I
> cannot merge this.

Additional remark: you should split the retry mechanism and callback
addition to separate commits as they must be reasoned separately. See
the section one in:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.17/process/submitting-patches.html

"If your changes produce a lot of deltas, you need to split them into
individual patches which modify things in logical stages; see 3)
Separate your changes. This will facilitate review by other kernel
developers, very important if you want your patch accepted."

/Jarkko