linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Alternative TPM patches for Trenchboot

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: <CAMj1kXGwwLycnUdEXJ0kobYYgNxNMxDZJf+aqYQZdXgB5hhLyw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 17:24:54 +0100
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: ross.philipson@...cle.com
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, 
	"Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, 
	Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, 
	"open list:TPM DEVICE DRIVER" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Alternative TPM patches for Trenchboot

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 01:52, <ross.philipson@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/2/24 8:22 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > This is my alternative patch set to the TPM patches included into
> > Trenchboot series v11. I don't mind to which tree these are
> > picked in the end. All the patches also have my sob's, so in that
> > sense things are also cleared up.
> >
> > At least slmodule needs to be patched in the series given that
> > tpm_chip_set_locality() returns zero on success.
> >
> > It is not really my problem but I'm also wondering how the
> > initialization order is managed. What if e.g. IMA happens to
> > initialize before slmodule?
> >
> > Cc: Daniel P. Smith <dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com>
> > Cc: Ross Philipson <ross.philipson@...cle.com>
> > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> >
> > Daniel P. Smith (2):
> >    tpm, tpm_tis: Close all localities
> >    tpm, tpm_tis: Address positive localities in
> >      tpm_tis_request_locality()
> >
> > Ross Philipson (2):
> >    tpm, tpm_tis: allow to set locality to a different value
> >    tpm: sysfs: Show locality used by kernel
> >
> >   drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c     | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >   drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c    | 10 ++++++++++
> >   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> >   include/linux/tpm.h             | 10 ++++++++++
> >   4 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
>
> Jarkko,
>
> We have tested with this latest RFC patch set and it does what we need.
> Things also functioned correctly when we closed down the TXT DRTM and
> brought up a follow on kernel with kexec. So we are good with dropping
> our TPM patches and adopting these. The last question is do you want to
> take these in directly as a standalone patch set or do you want us to
> submit them with our next patch set (v12)?
>
> And for what it is worth if you want it:
>
> Tested-by: Ross Philipson <ross.philipson@...cle.com>
>

If the patches as proposed work for you, please incorporate them into your v12.