linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: Add missing start/stop_tpm

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: <YBJSju6RX4LZx08N@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jan 2021 07:58:38 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc:     Łukasz Majczak <lma@...ihalf.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "Tj (Elloe Linux)" <ml.linux@...oe.vision>,
        Dirk Gouders <dirk@...ders.net>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Radoslaw Biernacki <rad@...ihalf.com>,
        Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>,
        Alex Levin <levinale@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: Add missing start/stop_tpm_chip calls

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 08:46:48AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-01-26 at 16:46 +0100, Łukasz Majczak wrote:
> > Hi Jarkko, Guenter
> > 
> > Yes, here are the logs when failure occurs -
> > https://gist.github.com/semihalf-majczak-lukasz/1575461f585f1e7fb1e9366b8eceaab9
> > Look for a phrase "TPM returned invalid status"
> 
> We've had other reports of this:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/ghsgagsnag.fsf@gouders.net/
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/374e918c-f167-9308-2bea-ae6bc6a3d2e3@elloe.vision/
> 
> The problem is some TIS TPMs don't begin in the correct locality so we
> have to set it.  When I proposed the check, I also proposed a fix for
> this problem:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20201001180925.13808-5-James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com/
> 
> But it's part of a series that never went upstream.  Part of the reason
> was Jarkko proposed the get/put patch to fix this instead, but that
> never went upstream either.  We need to decide an approach and apply
> one or other fixes.

Can you remind me what I proposed? I remember only proposing removing
interrupt code.

Can you pick up just 1/5 and 2/5 from that serieis and send them as a
mini series?

I had one remark for 1/5, which can be found here:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20201024120744.GA32607@kernel.org/

I don't think there was never argument on locality changes.

/Jarkko