From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mimi Zohar Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] security/keys/encrypted: Break module dependency chain Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 21:20:47 -0400 Message-ID: <1553044847.4899.169.camel@linux.ibm.com> References: <155297557534.2276575.16264199708584900090.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <1553029714.2932.43.camel@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1553029714.2932.43.camel@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: James Bottomley , Dan Williams , keyrings@vger.kernel.org Cc: Ira Weiny , Dave Jiang , Tyler Hicks , Keith Busch , Jarkko Sakkinen , David Howells , Vishal Verma , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, Roberto Sassu , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Tue, 2019-03-19 at 14:08 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2019-03-19 at 14:01 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:18 PM Dan Williams > om> wrote: > > >=20 > > > With v5.1-rc1 all the nvdimm sub-system regression tests started > > > failing because the libnvdimm module failed to load in the qemu-kvm=20 > > > test environment. Critically that environment does not have a TPM. > > > Commit 240730437deb "KEYS: trusted: explicitly use tpm_chip > > > structure..." started to require a TPM to be present for the > > > trusted.ko module to load where there was no requirement for that > > > before. > > >=20 > > > Rather than undo the "fail if no hardware" behavior James points > > > out that the module dependencies can be broken by looking up the > > > key-type by name. Remove the dependencies on the "key_type_trusted" > > > and "key_type_encrypted" symbol exports, and clean up other > > > boilerplate that supported those exports in different > > > configurations. > >=20 > > Any feedback? Was hoping to get at least patch1 in the queue for > > v5.1-rc2 since this effectively disables the nvdimm driver on typical > > configurations. Jarkko, would you be willing to merge it since the > > regression came through your tree? >=20 > The reason I sent out the RFC was to see if the people who actually > wrote the code had any reasons they needed the current way of doing > things preserving. No, it looks fine. =C2=A0The error return codes will change, but I don't think that is a problem. Mimi >=20 > I think your series looks fine except you need to export > key_type_lookup (patch 2) before you use it (patch 1) to preserve > bisectability of builds. >=20 > James