On Mon May 28 18, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Hello,
Top posting, sorry.
I don't know if I did it well to include the "Tested-by" tag because I
don't see that the patch has landed in linus branch already.
And as far as I understand, this will not be in the upcoming 4.17
release as we are already late in the cycle?
Kind regards,
Laurent Bigonville
It should go into his branch during the merge window for 4.18.
Le 11/05/18 à 21:02, Laurent Bigonville a écrit :
Le 05/05/18 à 22:03, Jerry Snitselaar a écrit :
On Sat May 05 18, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
For certain tpm chips releasing locality can take long enough that a
subsequent call to request_locality will see the locality as being
active when the access register is read in check_locality. So check
that the locality has been released before returning from
release_locality.
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@xxxxxx>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Laurent Bigonville <bigon@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Laurent Bigonville <bigon@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 47
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
index 5a1f47b43947..d547cd309dbd 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
@@ -143,13 +143,58 @@ static bool check_locality(struct tpm_chip
*chip, int l)
return false;
}
+static bool locality_inactive(struct tpm_chip *chip, int l)
+{
+ struct tpm_tis_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
+ int rc;
+ u8 access;
+
+ rc = tpm_tis_read8(priv, TPM_ACCESS(l), &access);
+ if (rc < 0)
+ return false;
+
+ if ((access & (TPM_ACCESS_VALID | TPM_ACCESS_ACTIVE_LOCALITY))
+ == TPM_ACCESS_VALID)
+ return true;
+
+ return false;
+}
+
static int release_locality(struct tpm_chip *chip, int l)
{
struct tpm_tis_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
+ unsigned long stop, timeout;
+ long rc;
tpm_tis_write8(priv, TPM_ACCESS(l), TPM_ACCESS_ACTIVE_LOCALITY);
- return 0;
+ stop = jiffies + chip->timeout_a;
+
+ if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ) {
+again:
+ timeout = stop - jiffies;
+ if ((long)timeout <= 0)
+ return -1;
+
+ rc = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(priv->int_queue,
+ (locality_inactive(chip, l)),
+ timeout);
+
+ if (rc > 0)
+ return 0;
+
+ if (rc == -ERESTARTSYS && freezing(current)) {
+ clear_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING);
+ goto again;
+ }
+ } else {
+ do {
+ if (locality_inactive(chip, l))
+ return 0;
+ tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
+ } while (time_before(jiffies, stop));
+ }
+ return -1;
}
static int request_locality(struct tpm_chip *chip, int l)
--
2.15.0
Laurent,
Can you try this patch with your system since it is the one
that has exhibited the problem so far. I've tested on a
tpm2.0 and tpm1.2 system here.
Regards,
Jerry
