linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 06/10] tpm, tpm_tis: Only handle supported interrupts in wait_for_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]

Date:   Thu, 16 Jun 2022 00:08:20 +0200
From:   Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc:     peterhuewe@....de, jgg@...pe.ca, stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        linux@...ewoehner.de, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, l.sanfilippo@...bus.com,
        lukas@...ner.de, p.rosenberger@...bus.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/10] tpm, tpm_tis: Only handle supported interrupts
 in wait_for_tpm_stat()

On 15.06.22 at 20:21, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 01:08:42PM +0200, LinoSanfilippo@....de wrote:
>> From: Lino Sanfilippo <l.sanfilippo@...bus.com>
>>
>> According to the TPM Interface Specification (TIS) interrupts for
>> "stsValid" and "commandReady" might not be supported.
>>
>> Take this into account and only wait for interrupts which are actually in
>> use in wait_for_tpm_stat(). After that process all the remaining status
>> changes by polling the status register.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lino Sanfilippo <l.sanfilippo@...bus.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> index 2f03fefa1706..028bec44362d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> @@ -53,41 +53,63 @@ static int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
>>  	long rc;
>>  	u8 status;
>>  	bool canceled = false;
>> +	u8 active_irqs = 0;
>
> Something like sts_mask would be a better name. Calling it
> 'active_irqs' is a bit confusing.

Ok.

Regards,
Lino