From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f47.google.com (mail-wm1-f47.google.com [209.85.128.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A22217BB21; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 17:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.47 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750439987; cv=none; b=Vb/JpgjIamebTjmdS/p93j4PgSTOTTYw65u3FRZBHn+gxn0y1VrbnjGCa5DhU/pZhOJOIeGQZRu8PPbIAmdTsgZMZB6vEZCrgROA/CVn2yn03DjRQ9TglQB+H3RR1SeEu++LJpEYzXs9QUP4Q41ab0KJKxUXB2jNNADI9qwivwM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750439987; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yTfyFomlAYC23JbMLP0F6GGfzLOVzSnfY0H8zplrHpw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=TckTo2cKgoBQXnVmmWom2Al5IqxCVy6V60XJIQyatiIqLO5wdak+ZvS75Cof8vGfQ5lSiYO34DIl5LP8uN41Q8nD7n4YS1DDTRiqmHzyut2IKJD0c5PtygBHJfrz3N8oWXYq7jbNrq4WphNruBkKA/uN/wq2gVA6+geBAopodoA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=O6fzGPxR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.47 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="O6fzGPxR" Received: by mail-wm1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-451d54214adso15738445e9.3; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 10:19:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1750439984; x=1751044784; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Nqp5RyaLWU1LSai70owrzduSyRWQ7M8PeiJ+ff4U6jY=; b=O6fzGPxRVDVP8hp7MYS0bl5TuByK344YR4ZVcOKca7aCfTdj4u2+JXs19ZrTbLydg/ lGmCLG8GE0/i6Wz4Oxd+lAmmgU+fct2YGax9JCTrONIzyAadbEZ5+zcdUbmKXu+W0IqY AhwrBMO6gnqskvQxtGrSnW5FN3AmySNXaEA3WGONBC3WI5KSVIg45DH6HHcORR3tfi/g ThEOOEQB1Ha17g8592Pj693cvBwEN5GFjLgi2XK/qrQGdo6cHAbE7hSG1P33/qAPXQJP NqpjVyowZ5bbSLa32E+x373m+e35VXDfGiaFH9gUDoHr7lGae0suvqGlVbRjhGEHFpyP /aHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1750439984; x=1751044784; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Nqp5RyaLWU1LSai70owrzduSyRWQ7M8PeiJ+ff4U6jY=; b=TrGcoMorWESnX7LTZ9qjI1pmX8PfjqHArkwKX8g52KZyGlMrORLG+gHUq5qOQP6yt3 iPAjCR/ygPp1zRnRYiNtkhaYMGsR3+upUENuN9Ru4nWCHbpSA0TiKFgx6symLoV6S4ZV 3TRVsHyF7o/nnS01qH5aWO8kak8pxdRj6ERF4yc6s03qhAU/sG9D/D2/5fipJZgImXR1 1c8SQSwTM6l66IuqBxDKFl6EysFghMFl77MqlrwC/3EfISZ6cPPOaoVSCqu9SyRLmDKb m9IOiDG+41NhQ99Ty1TtHTAlyWiq018+wIzmyef6psShZ/X+OD6tcerBsd07Ym0W3UmM J7Hw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUl0rVkcMv5MorGu18/OELIf1Tj6Bt9JWpUJCbDa9d1XGxp7Ayq7R4HNdhaQF4flMrUR8TeDHxbEuTtMimh68w=@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCXymmKpu469Za5CF4es1z0xWDigMpS7myPWHUgVFJFWt09JIdYOKbfa5p8ij5yFBkB+g7kQNUOv/WOvrxQl@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzHa1QOIyx5rLvd5RF/tjS/BSIbG/PNs6Xucy/PgWvvgX7rqqRZ CKvksxwmA+k9HiICb1/ePreHyRlE5vrBEJSNKeAAhJzP9bTHG2W3Q+WsY7zCOTwg7Rw= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv7HhD7v+X50bSQsLUmWE0J/kbR74GJm12cA20tpty3ZROTtrvH4OVQEXEgGhg yV+2pX7Y130hewPgyhbC6DkBhDHbSz9KHa8n6JN9mdq2PjatVlI4RvODol48N/yRdMOyaaAExOR /cQYc3WGdVc0LFPUytqINWV3MLoidgWQxNkwFG9ivyqwZBbie1spfym9k7E1cpjaz9YpD5T0fBt NmxD+IxWSJW7jQozKd++4ShzmW9AgQmu/JoPlhxnj5ZDSZ1XrLj6xlyUEYejfS6mKL786EvEEfw mwZj5XgytbV6/837CTAA+FUvds3ZTF2ir3zgW3JsVStQzeKiFkhoovaUmYHpRtLDXdxMezSo1rF xynBqOTb+lrdkKAgvo1oUq9VL1F/dbrl1bNPKfriicS0dy52SzuP/Dg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG7nUurIlUkJSmJUrsRS663QPvCJsqVcHeV3pcLn+ixZg+fKc92NRxtysFHaINml1r46SFseQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:584d:0:b0:3a5:42:b17b with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3a6d1322b83mr2901841f8f.29.1750439984381; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 10:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2a02:8012:e013:0:9139:5f50:46fd:9f3f? ([2a02:8012:e013:0:9139:5f50:46fd:9f3f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-3a6d0f18215sm2553836f8f.29.2025.06.20.10.19.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 20 Jun 2025 10:19:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 18:19:43 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Fix the timeout & use ktime To: Jarkko Sakkinen , "Orlov, Ivan" Cc: "peterhuewe@gmx.de" , "jgg@ziepe.ca" , "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Woodhouse, David" References: <20250611162508.85149-1-iorlov@amazon.com> Content-Language: en-US From: "Orlov, Ivan" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/06/2025 18:02, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> Instead, perform the check in the following way: >> >> 1. Read the current timestamp >> 2. Read the completion status. If completed, return the result >> 3. Sleep >> 4. Check if the timestamp read at step 1 exceeds the timeout. Return >> an error if it does >> 5. Goto 1 >> >> Also, use ktime instead of jiffes as a more reliable and precise timing >> source. > > "also", i.e. a logically separate change which should be split up to > a separate patch. > Got it, will send this enhancement as a separate patch. >> + curr_time = ktime_get(); >> u8 status = tpm_chip_status(chip); >> if ((status & chip->ops->req_complete_mask) == >> chip->ops->req_complete_val) >> @@ -140,7 +149,7 @@ static ssize_t tpm_try_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, void *buf, size_t bufsiz) >> >> tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL); >> rmb(); >> - } while (time_before(jiffies, stop)); >> + } while (ktime_before(curr_time, timeout)); > > > Wouldn't it be simpler fix to just check completion after dropping out > of the loop? > yes, this should also solve the problem without taking additional space on the stack with new vars. Will update in V2, thanks! > And declare this before tpm_try_transmit(): > > static bool tpm_transmit_completed(struct tpm_chip *chip) > { > u8 status = tpm_chip_status(chip); > > return (status & chip->ops->req_complete_mask) == chip->ops->req_complete_val; > } > Cool, will do. Thanks for the review and sorry for the late reply. -- Kind regards, Ivan Orlov