linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] tpm_tis: Remove the HID IFX0102

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]

Date:   Mon, 6 Jul 2020 17:00:51 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Peter.Huewe@...ineon.com
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, kjhall@...ibm.com,
        ferry.toth@...inga.info, peterhuewe@....de, jgg@...pe.ca,
        arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, akpm@...l.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tpm_tis: Remove the HID IFX0102

On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 11:46:46AM +0000, Peter.Huewe@...ineon.com wrote:
> Hi,
> NACK
> 
> > % git --no-pager grep IFX0102 drivers/char/tpm
> > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_infineon.c:	{"IFX0102", 0},
> > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c:	{"IFX0102", 0},		/* Infineon */
> > Obviously IFX0102 was added to the HID table for the TCG TIS driver by mistake.
> 
> The HID IFX0102 was NOT added by mistake.
> Let me explain the history a bit:
> 
> Old SLB 9635 / 9630 TPMs had two ways to interface them
> - proprietary 'io' mapped protocol (tpm_infineon) - tis protocol  (tpm_tis)
> 
> Both match the same HID.
> However with the emerging of the tis protocol, the io protocol eventually went away for newer products.
> So all TPM1.2 by IFX match the HID0102 and the TCG generic ones PNP0C31
> 
> So basically you break TPM1.2 support for all (newer) Infineon chips if the platform vendor used the IFX0102 HID as they would speak via tpm_infineon driver.
> The bug must be something different, especially as it only seems to happen after suspend resume.

Peter,

Looking at dmesg:

1. tmp_infineon initializes cleanly
2. tpm_tis fails misserably with bunch error messages

I'm cool with reverting the patch though. Please send a revert patch and
explain this in the commit message because right now what you are saying
is completely undocumented.

Also, this tpm_infineon issue needs to be fixed properly after the
revert.

The bugzilla bug is unrelated to this issue but it causes extra harm
fixing any bugs and confusion among the users as the bug discussions
proves.

How do we get the quirks for tpm_tis and tpm_infineon so that they can
separate each other?

/Jarkko