linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] tpm: Move buffer handling from static inlines to real functions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <CWHPA3T3YIJT.148L3L98EXBXD@suppilovahvero>
Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2023 20:35:55 +0300
From:   "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     "Jerry Snitselaar" <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
Cc:     <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>, <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
        "James Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        "William Roberts" <bill.c.roberts@...il.com>,
        "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "David Howells" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        "Mimi Zohar" <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Peter Huewe" <peterhuewe@....de>,
        "Mario Limonciello" <mario.limonciello@....com>,
        "Julien Gomes" <julien@...sta.com>,
        "open list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] tpm: Move buffer handling from static inlines to
 real functions

On Wed Oct 25, 2023 at 12:03 PM EEST, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>

On Wed, 2023-10-25 at 02:03 -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
>

Thanks I'll add it to the next round.

For the tpm_buf_read(), I was thinking along the lines of:

/**
 * tpm_buf_read() - Read from a TPM buffer
 * @buf:	&tpm_buf instance
 * @pos:	position within the buffer
 * @count:	the number of bytes to read
 * @output:	the output buffer
 *
 * Read bytes from a TPM buffer, and update the position. Returns false when the
 * amount of bytes requested would overflow the buffer, which is expected to
 * only happen in the case of hardware failure.
 */
static bool tpm_buf_read(const struct tpm_buf *buf, off_t *pos, size_t count, void *output)
{
	off_t next = *pos + count;

	if (next >= buf->length) {
		pr_warn("%s: %lu >= %lu\n", __func__, next, *offset);
		return false;
	}

	memcpy(output, &buf->data[*pos], count);
	*offset = next;
	return true;
}

BR, Jarkko