On 3/6/25 11:07 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:42:12AM -0800, Ross Philipson wrote:
From: "Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Validate that the input locality is within the correct range, as specified
by TCG standards, and increase the locality count also for the positive
localities.
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ross Philipson <ross.philipson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
index c58f360fb4a4..c86100ad743a 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
@@ -234,10 +234,13 @@ static int tpm_tis_request_locality(struct tpm_chip *chip, int l)
struct tpm_tis_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
int ret = 0;
+ if (l < 0 || l > TPM_MAX_LOCALITY)
+ return -EINVAL;
I would mind if we put do dev_warn() here because it is unexpected
condition or even perhaps dev_err(). Or am I missing something?
No I think you are right. We will look at it but will likely take your
suggestion here.
Thanks
Ross
+
mutex_lock(&priv->locality_count_mutex);
if (priv->locality_count == 0)
ret = __tpm_tis_request_locality(chip, l);
- if (!ret)
+ if (ret >= 0)
priv->locality_count++;
mutex_unlock(&priv->locality_count_mutex);
return ret;
--
2.39.3
I agree with this now.
BR, Jarkko
