linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP CAAM-based trusted keys

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: <146776265.87663.1615968459694.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date:   Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:07:39 +0100 (CET)
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:     Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
Cc:     Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        kernel <kernel@...gutronix.de>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        horia geanta <horia.geanta@....com>,
        aymen sghaier <aymen.sghaier@....com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        davem <davem@...emloft.net>, Udit Agarwal <udit.agarwal@....com>,
        david <david@...ma-star.at>,
        Franck Lenormand <franck.lenormand@....com>,
        "open list:ASYMMETRIC KEYS" <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, jlu@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP
 CAAM-based trusted keys

Sumit,

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>> >  module_param_named(source, trusted_key_source, charp, 0);
>> > -MODULE_PARM_DESC(source, "Select trusted keys source (tpm or tee)");
>> > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(source, "Select trusted keys source (tpm, tee or caam)");
>>
>> I didn't closely follow the previous discussions, but is a module
>> parameter really the right approach?
>> Is there also a way to set it via something like device tree?
>>
> 
> It's there to support a platform which possesses multiple trusted keys
> backends. So that a user is able to select during boot which one to
> use as a backend.

I understand the use case, my question was whether it makes actually sense to
have a module parameter for it, or additionally another way to define the
preferred backend.

Thanks,
//richard