[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAC_iWjLzaSBz3_j=rz73QLCBX_YouCL+KBvR7sXMFFMQA3pOPg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:58:48 +0300
From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
To: Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@...aro.org>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt@...onical.com>,
Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/5] introduce tee-based EFI Runtime Variable Service
On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 at 05:41, Masahisa Kojima
<masahisa.kojima@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> 2023年8月15日(火) 2:23 Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>:
>>
>> On 14.08.23 11:24, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>> > Hi Jan,
>> >
>> > On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 05:53, Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@...aro.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> This series introduces the tee based EFI Runtime Variable Service.
>> >>
>> >> The eMMC device is typically owned by the non-secure world(linux in
>> >> this case). There is an existing solution utilizing eMMC RPMB partition
>> >> for EFI Variables, it is implemented by interacting with
>> >> OP-TEE, StandaloneMM(as EFI Variable Service Pseudo TA), eMMC driver
>> >> and tee-supplicant. The last piece is the tee-based variable access
>> >> driver to interact with OP-TEE and StandaloneMM.
>> >>
>> >> Changelog:
>> >> v7 -> v8
>> >> Only patch #3 "efi: Add tee-based EFI variable driver" is updated.
>> >> - fix typos
>> >> - refactor error handling, direct return if applicable
>> >> - use devm_add_action_or_reset() for closing of tee context/session
>> >> - remove obvious comment
>> >
>> > Any chance you can run this and see if it solves your issues?
>> >
>>
>> I also need [1], and I still need a cleanup script before terminating
>> the tee-supplicant, right?
>
>
> Yes, we need patch[1] and a cleanup script.
> Sorry, I should note in the cover letter.
>
>> And if need some service in the initrd
>> already, I still need to start the supplicant there and transfer its
>> ownership to systemd later on?
>
> Yes.
>
>> These patches here only make life easier
>> if the supplicant is started by systemd, after efivarfs has been
>> mounted, correct?
Not systemd specifically. Any tool that can signal
<dev>/driver/unbind would work. Sumit is just reusing the default
unbind notification mechanism
Thanks
/Ilias
>
> Yes.
>
> Thanks,
> Masahisa Kojima
>
>>
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/7/28/853
>>
>> --
>> Siemens AG, Technology
>> Linux Expert Center
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists