From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li>
Cc: "Orlov, Ivan" <iorlov@amazon.co.uk>,
"peterhuewe@gmx.de" <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
"jgg@ziepe.ca" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
"linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tpm: Fix the timeout & use ktime
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 19:49:29 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aFwomWU28ijZj3CZ@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aFwnG--lzZO0mQgc@kernel.org>
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 07:43:11PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 09:52:58PM +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 06:08:31PM +0000, Orlov, Ivan wrote:
> > > The current implementation of timeout detection works in the following
> > > way:
> > >
> > > 1. Read completion status. If completed, return the data
> > > 2. Sleep for some time (usleep_range)
> > > 3. Check for timeout using current jiffies value. Return an error if
> > > timed out
> > > 4. Goto 1
> > >
> > > usleep_range doesn't guarantee it's always going to wake up strictly in
> > > (min, max) range, so such a situation is possible:
> > >
> > > 1. Driver reads completion status. No completion yet
> > > 2. Process sleeps indefinitely. In the meantime, TPM responds
> > > 3. We check for timeout without checking for the completion again.
> > > Result is lost.
> > >
> > > Such a situation also happens for the guest VMs: if vCPU goes to sleep
> > > and doesn't get scheduled for some time, the guest TPM driver will
> > > timeout instantly after waking up without checking for the completion
> > > (which may already be in place).
> > >
> > > Perform the completion check once again after exiting the busy loop in
> > > order to give the device the last chance to send us some data.
> > >
> > > Since now we check for completion in two places, extract this check into
> > > a separate function.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Orlov <iorlov@amazon.com>
> > > ---
> > > V1 -> V2:
> > > - Exclude the jiffies -> ktime change from the patch
> > > - Instead of recording the time before checking for completion, check
> > > for completion once again after leaving the loop
> > >
> > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> > > index 8d7e4da6ed53..6960ee2798e1 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> > > @@ -82,6 +82,13 @@ static bool tpm_chip_req_canceled(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 status)
> > > return chip->ops->req_canceled(chip, status);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static bool tpm_transmit_completed(struct tpm_chip *chip)
> > > +{
> > > + u8 status_masked = tpm_chip_status(chip) & chip->ops->req_complete_mask;
> > > +
> > > + return status_masked == chip->ops->req_complete_val;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static ssize_t tpm_try_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, void *buf, size_t bufsiz)
> > > {
> > > struct tpm_header *header = buf;
> > > @@ -129,8 +136,7 @@ static ssize_t tpm_try_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, void *buf, size_t bufsiz)
> > > stop = jiffies + tpm_calc_ordinal_duration(chip, ordinal);
> > > do {
> > > u8 status = tpm_chip_status(chip);
> > > - if ((status & chip->ops->req_complete_mask) ==
> > > - chip->ops->req_complete_val)
> > > + if (tpm_transmit_completed(chip))
> > > goto out_recv;
> >
> > The only thing I'd point out here is we end up doing a double status read
> > one after the other (once here, once in tpm_transmit_completed), and I'm
> > pretty sure I've seen instances where that caused a problem.
>
> It would be easy to to prevent at least double reads after completion
> e.g., in tpm_chip_status():
>
> /*
> * Read the chip status bitmask. After completion, the returned will mask will
> * return value cached at the point of completion up until the next transmit.
> */
> static u8 tpm_chip_status(struct tpm_chip *chip)
> {
> u8 status_masked = chip->status & chip->ops_req_complete_mask;
>
> if (status_masked == chip->ops->req_complete_val)
> return chip->status;
>
> chip->status = tpm_chip_status(chip);
OOPS:
chip->status = chip->ops->status(chip);
Couple of additional constraints:
1. tpm_chip_alloc() should initialize chip->status to chip->ops->req_complete_mask.
2. tpm_try_transmit() should reset the value to chip->ops->req_complete_mask on
failure paths.
With these constraints there is framework where chip->ops->status() is
only invoked when it actually makes sense i.e., only during the course
of tpm_try_trasmit().
BR, Jarkko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-25 16:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-20 18:08 [PATCH v2] tpm: Fix the timeout & use ktime Orlov, Ivan
2025-06-20 22:03 ` Orlov, Ivan
2025-06-22 20:52 ` Jonathan McDowell
2025-06-25 16:43 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-06-25 16:49 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2025-07-04 9:02 ` Jonathan McDowell
2025-07-04 15:16 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-07-04 15:39 ` Orlov, Ivan
2025-07-04 15:51 ` Jonathan McDowell
2025-07-19 11:37 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-07-19 20:19 ` Orlov, Ivan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aFwomWU28ijZj3CZ@kernel.org \
--to=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=iorlov@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=noodles@earth.li \
--cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.