From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org by pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org (Dovecot) with LMTP id 5U2cA5dAGVvuYwAAmS7hNA ; Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:27:00 +0000 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3050F608BF; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 14:27:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A69E6063F; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 14:26:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 8A69E6063F Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933691AbeFGO06 (ORCPT + 25 others); Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:26:58 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:35642 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933494AbeFGO0y (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:26:54 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Jun 2018 07:26:53 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,486,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="54822200" Received: from nzou1-mobl1.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.254.60]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Jun 2018 07:26:49 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 17:26:48 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: "Winkler, Tomas" Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , "Usyskin, Alexander" , "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: separate cmd_ready/go_idle from runtime_pm Message-ID: <20180607142648.GA19909@linux.intel.com> References: <20180522091732.GA5228@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9D89D350@hasmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180523131616.GD363@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9D8A1269@hasmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180530105034.GA14905@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9D940DC6@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180530233752.GA31296@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9D945893@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180607102433.GA16506@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9D9477DD@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9D9477DD@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 11:03:50AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jarkko Sakkinen [mailto:jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com] > > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2018 13:25 > > To: Winkler, Tomas > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe ; Usyskin, Alexander > > ; linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > security-module@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: separate cmd_ready/go_idle from runtime_pm > > > > On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 11:01:42AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 10:52:28AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 01:48:17PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:27:46AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:46:00PM +0300, Tomas Winkler > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > New wrappers are added tpm_cmd_ready() and > > > > > > > > > > > tpm_go_idle() > > > > > > > > wrappers > > > > > > > > > > > to streamline tpm_try_transmit code. > > > > TPM_TRANSMIT_UNLOCKED > > > > > > > > > > > flag > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > abused > > > > > > > > > > > to resolve tpm spaces recursive calls to tpm_transmit(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This looks good and all but I don't think we want to > > > > > > > > > > abuse anything in the driver code, do we? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not abuse just the flag UNLOCKED is not really named > > > > > > > > > correctly I think this has to be backported so wanted to > > > > > > > > > do less invasive > > > > > > change. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It should be renamed anyway and possible merge conflicts are > > > > > > > > not hard to sort out in this change. Can you rename it as SPACE? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure, I believe UNLOCKED is still better name than SPACE, > > > > > > >I'm not sure this is Do you also want to remove > > TPM_TRANSMIT_RAW? > > > > > > > clk_enable is handling its own anti recursion counter 'data- > > > > > > >clkrun_enabled' > > > > > > > but it should be all handled under one flag I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right, and even without rename this will probably cause > > > > > > > > merge conflicts at least in v4.4 an v4.9 since in-kernel RM > > > > > > > > landed in v4.12, so not much gain not do the rename :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I belive we should do minimal change and the big cleanup after > > that. > > > > > > > Not sure, I believe UNLOCKED is still better name than SPACE > > > > > > > even it wasn't > > > > > > the original intention. > > > > > > > No the SPACE is the issue, but any recursion call into > > > > > > > tpm_transmit. A bigger change is needed and rename to SPACE > > > > > > > would be just another > > > > > > intermediat change. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please reconsider. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > Tomas > > > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it mean you're Okay with the patch now? > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Tomas > > > > > > > > The change looks good but I'll have to test it. > > > Any updates? > > > Thanks > > > > Tested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen > > I've just realized we have issue in tpm_unseal_trusted() > As TPM_TRANSMIT_UNLOCKED is used really just in 'locking' sense of the flow, it's not nested. > Any of testing flows doesn't covers it. It's used only from by security/keys/trusted.c only > > Then I don't have a short fix for this issue. Will use TPM_TRANSMIT_RAW, > maybe calling it TPM_TRANSMIT_NESTED. Ah, nested would a good name for that. /Jarkko