From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 20:36:02 -0300 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] ima: skip verifying TPM 2.0 PCR values In-Reply-To: <20191024191402.GB12038@linux.intel.com> References: <1558041162.3971.2.camel@linux.ibm.com> <20190517150456.GA11796@dell5510> <20191024121848.GA5908@dell5510> <20191024172023.GA7948@linux.intel.com> <20191024182005.GZ23952@ziepe.ca> <20191024191402.GB12038@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <20191024233602.GF23952@ziepe.ca> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 10:14:02PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 03:20:05PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 08:20:23PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > Also replicants for durations and timeouts files would make sense for > > > TPM 2.0. > > > > These ones don't meet the sysfs standard of one value per file, which > > is why they didn't make it to tpm2 > > They would be still useful to have available in some form as there is > no way deduce them from the user space. Why? Userspace doesn't refer to these values since the kernel handles all the timeouts, right? Jason