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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <7412e1e0-0e28-41a6-a4aa-a3fc97d36468@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:51:52 -0800
From: ross.philipson@...cle.com
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, "Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, 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 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>

Thanks again for your help.
Ross