linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm: Re-enable TPM chip boostrapping non-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: <6e61385de6044932aabfc407ed8bc368f7e9631f.camel@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 14:12:47 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Lino Sanfilippo <l.sanfilippo@...bus.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, heng.su@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Re-enable TPM chip boostrapping non-tpm_tis TPM
 drivers

On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 13:52 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 09:58 +0800, Pengfei Xu wrote:
> > On 2023-04-26 at 21:58:33 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > TPM chip bootstrapping was removed from tpm_chip_register(), and it
> > > was relocated to tpm_tis_core. This breaks all drivers which are not
> > > based on tpm_tis because the chip will not get properly initialized.
> > > 
> > > Take the corrective steps:
> > > 1. Rename tpm_chip_startup() as tpm_chip_bootstrap() and make it one-shot.
> > > 2. Call tpm_chip_bootstrap() in tpm_chip_register(), which reverts the
> > >    things  as tehy used to be.
> >            ^ two space and one typo "they"
> > 	   Thanks for your fixed patch in short time!
> > 
> >   And I tested this patch, it could not be reproduced in 155s, and the patch
> >   fixed this issue.
> >   Fixed dmesg is in attached.
> > 
> > Tested-by: Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>
> 
> Thanks a lot! I'll take immediate action to send PR to Linus.
> 
> Lino: no worries. It was expected that such a large refactorization
> could break a thing or two. You did a good job in any case.

Done: https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/4/27/297

BR, Jarkko