Hi Stefan,
On Tue, 2018-06-26 at 15:09 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> Get rid of ima_used_chip and use ima_tpm_chip variable instead for
> determining whether to use the TPM chip.
I don't see a need for separating this change from the previous patch.
Could you squash this patch with the previous one?
As Jarkko has already queued the TPM patches, there's no need for
posting them. Posting just this one IMA patch is fine.
thanks!
Mimi
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 1 -
> security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c | 2 +-
> security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c | 7 ++-----
> security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> index 35409461a3f2..2ab1affffa36 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> @@ -53,7 +53,6 @@ enum tpm_pcrs { TPM_PCR0 = 0, TPM_PCR8 = 8 };
> extern int ima_policy_flag;
>
> /* set during initialization */
> -extern int ima_used_chip;
> extern int ima_hash_algo;
> extern int ima_appraise;
> extern struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip;
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> index 88082f35adb2..7e7e7e7c250a 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ int ima_calc_buffer_hash(const void *buf, loff_t len,
>
> static void __init ima_pcrread(int idx, u8 *pcr)
> {
> - if (!ima_used_chip)
> + if (!ima_tpm_chip)
> return;
>
> if (tpm_pcr_read(ima_tpm_chip, idx, pcr) != 0)
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> index 1437ed3dbccc..faac9ecaa0ae 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> @@ -26,7 +26,6 @@
>
> /* name for boot aggregate entry */
> static const char *boot_aggregate_name = "boot_aggregate";
> -int ima_used_chip;
> struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip;
>
> /* Add the boot aggregate to the IMA measurement list and extend
> @@ -65,7 +64,7 @@ static int __init ima_add_boot_aggregate(void)
> iint->ima_hash->algo = HASH_ALGO_SHA1;
> iint->ima_hash->length = SHA1_DIGEST_SIZE;
>
> - if (ima_used_chip) {
> + if (ima_tpm_chip) {
> result = ima_calc_boot_aggregate(&hash.hdr);
> if (result < 0) {
> audit_cause = "hashing_error";
> @@ -110,9 +109,7 @@ int __init ima_init(void)
> int rc;
>
> ima_tpm_chip = tpm_default_chip();
> -
> - ima_used_chip = ima_tpm_chip != NULL;
> - if (!ima_used_chip)
> + if (!ima_tpm_chip)
> pr_info("No TPM chip found, activating TPM-bypass!\n");
>
> rc = integrity_init_keyring(INTEGRITY_KEYRING_IMA);
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
> index c6303fa19a49..b186819bd5aa 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static int ima_pcr_extend(const u8 *hash, int pcr)
> {
> int result = 0;
>
> - if (!ima_used_chip)
> + if (!ima_tpm_chip)
> return result;
>
> result = tpm_pcr_extend(ima_tpm_chip, pcr, hash);
