From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0816BCD3427 for ; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:05:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:From: Subject:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=AUDjBRUu42d69Q7ZuzQ4M1Lgt5adZxichyo28UabSBU=; b=B29MDfwnplrY+J5t/oScbJATOw OSnzUCcccAs8mcoWwXUVubm5Mw8F3MT2kvSke9XXcOMyDUtb7u/PKVCvEKSk0hEo4aT4g5Vo3HuzO WNC9gtLkKHBAeYj3sB0pQLw6ve4gvbvDPD0HTrJsNMGpVVzCRPSjUS4DM1Jx73lI9q7MvfsDNB31P YUxssVh5gKrpOtuEcinTaUAwDj19ddJYSFnw1vA8/n9/PT2TIBuq9OMSAauDzYJisqyZooXU5Hgq3 NkYTD2Lp2gSjkwHpgqO+gu+KyB8UkWkmQqg3cCHfMSgZYHd56/RnMmNU10zEiBUi4c1xBgS8KcI/X 6feucp6A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wKMwz-0000000HUgP-1hN5; Tue, 05 May 2026 21:05:05 +0000 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wKMwv-0000000HUfp-488E for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 05 May 2026 21:05:03 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0360083.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 645D7QTH2292989; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:04:35 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=AUDjBR Uu42d69Q7ZuzQ4M1Lgt5adZxichyo28UabSBU=; b=HCj5CcPKYikI4EXqLFSR32 RsCeyKYK4Ae9s5074Q4n81zDCeSOvl0+ryfg3AyxCOZmqOYSg6BuqB/BViaaKme3 0juCObvzEaB0TW4ONzAU80XdlZkHveFtr8AhuUgeTz0v4vyIdNOy8oGoctm47+oa GaABYxL0I4pw+psOOyR1X6se4AXzElJrVaFkb1zYViaBaPUPgWuC+y3Yh6kTsz4B Ln7f0ThwNK2eYTCNs7TMvuuTVWcIGI/ixNHA9/rLDlsbf7qkZPENB6DJSW4efcZh uHr1Dx5WcmurhQdBMVUcxNMqYfeijAqqqv2AXZvBTi04nHPQyB1biICcpaJ90OLg == Received: from ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dd.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.221]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4dw9v7dt8t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 05 May 2026 21:04:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.7/8.18.1.7) with ESMTP id 645KsWcn012426; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:04:33 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.6]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4dwwtgb9nk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 05 May 2026 21:04:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [10.39.53.229]) by smtprelay04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 645L4WDq26804876 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 5 May 2026 21:04:33 GMT Received: from smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936445805C; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:04:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 517DC58059; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:04:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-43857255-d5e6-4659-90f1-fc5cee4750ad.ibm.com (unknown [9.61.111.233]) by smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:04:30 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: debugging late_initcall_sync measurements From: Mimi Zohar To: Paul Moore Cc: Yeoreum Yun , Jonathan McDowell , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com, roberto.sassu@huawei.com, dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, eric.snowberg@oracle.com, jarkko@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, sudeep.holla@kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, oupton@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, noodles@meta.com, sebastianene@google.com In-Reply-To: References: <7734099f5e7fda5480bca016a9e6707983325fbd.camel@linux.ibm.com> <9f188536f09a2db30877d6bfbb84aeaf2565cccf.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 17:02:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-2.fc42) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Reinject: loops=2 maxloops=12 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYwNTA1MDIwMCBTYWx0ZWRfX/jmQTDjhSyUW a6LYs6KgFw5yBnttZF55PGvDUHOVHG0/qGgWeitdnf84Bwm5tP1/EukNeStDDhrU+vnaff58Sdg uLUHji8keO2Ye8bXIe6XY9J9yz4z9nJ+hazK/O+EwWgR8+pyrPF+I72Dti2jfJFpss/FpSStdte f92YyKboWP4q9VNWxwkr3ntwRwWqd9nxbYkvejFSFh5Tgc/11KKCKB88XC/+F39BF2eZjXnieYs KNqPjJGNi8UBHeLye2eMh+xYQE32ZKBN0M6Y9X64ZcUcx1gLw8xPhTyfHsT7Zp0ShWeA3U/hdWn EB3j4DP82TCFb9t4txo5UFHx72aW74zAELoOjarM+8P/g5XrrVksOQcqHDLWKdH5OVWOViGlKPM a8GSWAN+I/sxj8krZgpCp6eX0E8tT3phzuOaNjnz3QbpJjR67DdlQlT8c8IqmVlY0npaVypitKC S1pb1mckg7MlFnKjKLw== X-Proofpoint-GUID: doRHrXqCZk_91sNo7rZqapY8EXxNdxoN X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: uNiSJ9wA4y033nK2ypxCDn3HwXZEBPdK X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=eu/vCIpX c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=69fa5b62 cx=c_pps a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:117 a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=NGcC8JguVDcA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=RnoormkPH1_aCDwRdu11:22 a=iQ6ETzBq9ecOQQE5vZCe:22 a=VwQbUJbxAAAA:8 a=VnNF1IyMAAAA:8 a=w4bfxRt4CrPX03RNmT0A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1143,Hydra:6.1.51,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-05-05_02,2026-04-30_02,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2604200000 definitions=main-2605050200 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260505_140502_035136_A9D895B1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.96 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2026-05-04 at 16:51 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Mon, May 4, 2026 at 8:03=E2=80=AFAM Mimi Zohar w= rote: > > On Sun, 2026-05-03 at 12:46 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > Regardless, assuming you always want IMA to leverage a TPMs when they > > > exist, your reply suggests that using an initcall based IMA init > > > scheme, even a late-sync initcall, may not be sufficient because > > > deferred TPM initialization could happen later, yes? > >=20 > > Well yeah. The TPM could be configured as a module, but that scenario = is not of > > interest. That's way too late. The case being addressed in this patch= set is > > when the TPM driver tries to initialize at device_initcall, returns > > EPROBE_DEFER, and is retried at deferred_probe_initcall (late_initcall)= . Since > > ordering within an initcall is not supported, this patch attempts to in= itialize > > IMA at late_initcall and similarly retries, in this case, at late_initc= all_sync. >=20 > Okay, so from a TPM initialization perspective you are satisfied with > a late-sync IMA initialization, yes? No. On some architectures moving IMA initialization from the late_initcall = to late_initcall_sync does not miss any measurement records. However, as previ= ously mentioned, Linux running in a PowerVM LPAR the move would drop ~30 measurem= ent records[1]. So no, only if the TPM is not initialized by late_initcall, sh= ould IMA retry at late_initcall_sync. Mimi [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/201b9172ac47c6766443c1f2343cab3548f= 33c29.camel@linux.ibm.com/