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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A99FC433DF for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 00:44:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E02206DF for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 00:44:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725768AbgE1AoC (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 20:44:02 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:64395 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725267AbgE1AoC (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 20:44:02 -0400 IronPort-SDR: l+b7n0Rwp/xVrCT4yZ8JpHIyghTGkF1rJERRMwQ5+yAM6yKQ3gIoYRsrERqzaxm1qZpPqkRcyS 6FX/Y7o/BZqw== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2020 17:44:01 -0700 IronPort-SDR: VIXRo54WpUwzMQnC8rn7LxjmYU6ZeHdgGrpZ5NsbRgbwQY9+Ab9vF0ehhRLsN/1BmiJOk/K/nz Gupa6XT/VOZA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,443,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="291806593" Received: from ederaloi-mobl2.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.252.44.51]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 May 2020 17:43:57 -0700 Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 03:43:55 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Mario.Limonciello@dell.com Cc: James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeffrin@rajagiritech.edu.in, alex@guzman.io Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Revert "tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode" Message-ID: <20200528004355.GA5877@linux.intel.com> References: <20200526183213.20720-1-mario.limonciello@dell.com> <1590520454.11810.40.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1590521924.15108.1.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <37da2695fe6de09d69e27b77f3e29e068596205f.camel@linux.intel.com> <4d1a53596af44c7b84f97aa4ce04a53c@AUSX13MPC105.AMER.DELL.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4d1a53596af44c7b84f97aa4ce04a53c@AUSX13MPC105.AMER.DELL.COM> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 08:18:56PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jarkko Sakkinen > > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2020 3:09 PM > > To: James Bottomley; Limonciello, Mario; peterhuewe@gmx.de; jgg@ziepe.ca > > Cc: arnd@arndb.de; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org; > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; jeffrin@rajagiritech.edu.in; alex@guzman.io > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Revert "tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode" > > > > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] What is this? > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 12:38 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 19:23 +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 13:32 -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > > > > > > This reverts commit d23d12484307b40eea549b8a858f5fffad913897. > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit has caused regressions for the XPS 9560 containing > > > > > > a Nuvoton TPM. > > > > > > > > > > Presumably this is using the tis driver? > > > > > > > > Correct. > > > > > > > > > > As mentioned by the reporter all TPM2 commands are failing with: > > > > > > ERROR:tcti:src/tss2-tcti/tcti- > > > > > > device.c:290:tcti_device_receive() > > > > > > Failed to read response from fd 3, got errno 1: Operation not > > > > > > permitted > > > > > > > > > > > > The reporter bisected this issue back to this commit which was > > > > > > backported to stable as commit 4d6ebc4. > > > > > > > > > > I think the problem is request_locality ... for some inexplicable > > > > > reason a failure there returns -1, which is EPERM to user space. > > > > > > > > > > That seems to be a bug in the async code since everything else > > > > > gives a ESPIPE error if tpm_try_get_ops fails ... at least no-one > > > > > assumes it gives back a sensible return code. > > > > > > > > > > What I think is happening is that with the patch the TPM goes > > > > > through a quick sequence of request, relinquish, request, > > > > > relinquish and it's the third request which is failing (likely > > > > > timing out). Without the patch, the patch there's only one > > > > > request,relinquish cycle because the ops are held while the async > > > > > work is executed. I have a vague recollection that there is a > > > > > problem with too many locality request in quick succession, but > > > > > I'll defer to Jason, who I think understands the intricacies of > > > > > localities better than I do. > > > > > > > > Thanks, I don't pretend to understand the nuances of this particular > > > > code, but I was hoping that the request to revert got some attention > > > > since Alex's kernel Bugzilla and message a few months ago to linux > > > > integrity weren't. > > > > > > > > > If that's the problem, the solution looks simple enough: just move > > > > > the ops get down because the priv state is already protected by the > > > > > buffer mutex > > > > > > > > Yeah, if that works for Alex's situation it certainly sounds like a > > > > better solution than reverting this patch as this patch actually does > > > > fix a problem reported by Jeffrin originally. > > > > > > > > Could you propose a specific patch that Alex and Jeffrin can perhaps > > > > both try? > > > > > > Um, what's wrong with the one I originally attached and which you quote > > > below? It's only compile tested, but I think it will work, if the > > > theory is correct. > > > > Please send a legit patch, thanks. > > > > /Jarkko > > Jarkko, > > After the confirmation from Alex that this patch attached to the end of the thread > worked, James did send a proper patch that can be accessed here: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20200527155800.ya43xm2ltuwduwjg@cantor/T/#t > > Thanks, Hi thanks a lot! I did read the full discussions and agree with the conclusions as I get a patch in proper form. Please ping next time a bit earlier. It's not that I don't want to deal with the issues quickly as possible. It's probably just that I've forgot something or missed. /Jarkko