On Thu Aug 15, 2024 at 4:22 PM CEST, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 03:56:26PM +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > Found an article [1] which could be relevant and downloaded and ran the
> > accompanying test program (written by Jason Donenfeld):
> > # ./amd-rdrand-bug
> > Your RDRAND() does not have the AMD bug.
> > # ./test-rdrand
> > RDRAND() = 0x47c993c0
> > RDRAND() = 0xec7c697d
> > ... (more seemingly random numbers)
> > RDRAND() = 0xba858101
>
> RDRAND isn't the same as CCP.
Ok. I don't know/understand enough to make that distinction.
> > # dmesg | grep ccp
> > [ 5.399853] ccp 0000:07:00.2: ccp: unable to access the device: you might
> > be running a broken BIOS.
> > [ 5.401031] ccp 0000:07:00.2: tee enabled
> > [ 5.401113] ccp 0000:07:00.2: psp enabled
>
> Looks like the kernel reports CCP as broken. As the above RDRAND test
> doesn't indicate anything about CCP, I don't see rationale for that
> determination to be wrong.
It could indeed be correct and that my BIOS is indeed broken.
> Actual test code is in drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp-dev-v5.c:
>
> /* Find available queues */
> qmr = ioread32(ccp->io_regs + Q_MASK_REG);
> /*
> * Check for a access to the registers. If this read returns
> * 0xffffffff, it's likely that the system is running a broken
> * BIOS which disallows access to the device. Stop here and fail
> * the initialization (but not the load, as the PSP could get
> * properly initialized).
> */
> if (qmr == 0xffffffff) {
> dev_notice(dev, "ccp: unable to access the device: you might be running a broken BIOS.\n");
> return 1;
> }
Yeah, I did find that and that's how I got to the recipient list.
In the linked article the author did receive all 0xffffffff, while I
didn't and that's why I wondered if there *could* be an issue there.
But as I don't understand this enough, I asked the experts.
Cheers,
Diederik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
