linux-kernel - Re: [Syzkaller & bisect] There is WARNING in tpm_chip_unregister in upstream patch "tpm: st33zp24: Mark ACPI and OF related data as maybe unused"

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:   Wed, 26 Apr 2023 16:26:12 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>, jarkko@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jgg@...pe.ca, heng.su@...el.com,
        peterhuewe@....de, dhowells@...hat.com, lkp@...el.com
Subject: Re: [Syzkaller & bisect] There is WARNING in tpm_chip_unregister in
 upstream patch "tpm: st33zp24: Mark ACPI and OF related data as maybe unused"

On 26/04/2023 11:10, Pengfei Xu wrote:
> Hi Jarkko and Krzysztof Kozlowski,
> 
> Greeting!
> 
> Platform: x86 platforms
> 
> There is WARNING in tpm_chip_unregister in upstream patch "tpm: st33zp24: Mark
> ACPI and OF related data as maybe unused":
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230424144130.1084795-1-jarkko@kernel.org/
> -> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230319141354.22907-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/
> 
> We tested Intel internal kernel and found that, the above patch caused below
> WARNING and then kernel BUG dmesg info. After reverted above commit on top
> of Intel internal kernel, this issue was gone.
> I checked that internal commit:"c3985d8b9c22 tpm: st33zp24: Mark ACPI and OF
> related data as maybe unused" was same as above link patch.
> This issue could be reproduced in 155s in VM.

I am trying to reproduce it with mentioned reproducer.

One problem is that commit c3985d8b9c22 (and that patch of mine) was
never in the linux-next. I checked last next releases, including
next-20230421 and there is no such change. It seems it was applied just
before merge window, so was not tested by anything before.

Best regards,
Krzysztof