On 11/1/2018 5:02 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
On Tue, 2018-10-30 at 16:47 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h index 633e16f42107..8662e8587dce 100644 --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ struct tpm_chip { const struct attribute_group *groups[3]; unsigned int groups_cnt;- u16 active_banks[7];+ struct tpm_bank_info active_banks[7];Commit 1db15344f874 ("tpm: implement TPM 2.0 capability to get active PCR banks") defined active_banks[7]. Subsequently, commit 4d23cc323cdb ("tpm: add securityfs support for TPM 2.0 firmware event log") defined TPM2_PCR_ACTIVE_BANKS as 3. I'm not sure which is the correct value, but the number of active_banks should not be hard coded here.
Jarkko, should I change the value of TPM2_PCR_ACTIVE_BANKS, or set the size of the active_banks array to TPM2_PCR_ACTIVE_BANKS?
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle; char ppi_version[TPM_PPI_VERSION_LEN + 1]; @@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ static inline u32 tpm2_rc_value(u32 rc) }int tpm2_pcr_read(struct tpm_chip *chip, int pcr_idx,- struct tpm_digest *digest_struct); + struct tpm_digest *digest_struct, u16 *digest_size_ptr); int tpm2_pcr_extend(struct tpm_chip *chip, int pcr_idx, u32 count, struct tpm_digest *digests); int tpm2_get_random(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *dest, size_t max); diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c index 8babd826ad27..8e821e7b4674 100644 --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c @@ -180,11 +180,12 @@ struct tpm2_pcr_read_out { * @chip: TPM chip to use. * @pcr_idx: index of the PCR to read. * @digest_struct: pcr bank and buffer current PCR value is written to. + * @digest_size_ptr: pointer to variable that stores the digest size. * * Return: Same as with tpm_transmit_cmd. */ int tpm2_pcr_read(struct tpm_chip *chip, int pcr_idx, - struct tpm_digest *digest_struct) + struct tpm_digest *digest_struct, u16 *digest_size_ptr) { int rc; struct tpm_buf buf; @@ -219,6 +220,9 @@ int tpm2_pcr_read(struct tpm_chip *chip, int pcr_idx, goto out; }+ if (digest_size_ptr)+ *digest_size_ptr = digest_size; + memcpy(digest_struct->digest, out->digest, digest_size); out: tpm_buf_destroy(&buf); @@ -249,7 +253,6 @@ int tpm2_pcr_extend(struct tpm_chip *chip, int pcr_idx, u32 count, struct tpm2_null_auth_area auth_area; int rc; int i; - int j;if (count > ARRAY_SIZE(chip->active_banks))return -EINVAL; @@ -271,14 +274,9 @@ int tpm2_pcr_extend(struct tpm_chip *chip, int pcr_idx, u32 count, tpm_buf_append_u32(&buf, count);for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {- for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(tpm2_hash_map); j++) { - if (digests[i].alg_id != tpm2_hash_map[j].tpm_id) - continue; - tpm_buf_append_u16(&buf, digests[i].alg_id); - tpm_buf_append(&buf, (const unsigned char - *)&digests[i].digest, - hash_digest_size[tpm2_hash_map[j].crypto_id]); - } + tpm_buf_append_u16(&buf, digests[i].alg_id); + tpm_buf_append(&buf, (const unsigned char *)&digests[i].digest, + chip->active_banks[i].digest_size); }These tpm2_pcr_extend changes don't belong here in this patch. Please move them to 1/5.
Also in this case, alg_id and digest_size are defined in patch 4/5.
rc = tpm_transmit_cmd(chip, NULL, buf.data, PAGE_SIZE, 0, 0, @@ -855,6 +853,26 @@ int tpm2_probe(struct tpm_chip *chip) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tpm2_probe);+static int tpm2_init_bank_info(struct tpm_chip *chip,+ struct tpm_bank_info *bank) +{ + struct tpm_digest digest = {.alg_id = bank->alg_id}; + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tpm2_hash_map); i++) { + enum hash_algo crypto_algo = tpm2_hash_map[i].crypto_id; + + if (bank->alg_id != tpm2_hash_map[i].tpm_id) + continue; + + bank->digest_size = hash_digest_size[crypto_algo]; + bank->crypto_id = crypto_algo; + return 0; + } + + return tpm2_pcr_read(chip, 0, &digest, &bank->digest_size); +} + struct tpm2_pcr_selection { __be16 hash_alg; u8 size_of_select; @@ -909,7 +927,12 @@ static ssize_t tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip) }memcpy(&pcr_selection, marker, sizeof(pcr_selection));- chip->active_banks[i] = be16_to_cpu(pcr_selection.hash_alg); + chip->active_banks[i].alg_id = + be16_to_cpu(pcr_selection.hash_alg); + rc = tpm2_init_bank_info(chip, &chip->active_banks[i]);Please fix the formatting in the above 2 lines. There's been discussion in the past on removing scripts/Lindent from the coding-style documentation, but that hasn't happened quite yet. I do think section 3 "New drivers" in Documentation/hwmon/submitting- patches has a good balance. * Running your patch or driver file(s) through checkpatch does not mean its formatting is clean. If unsure about formatting in your new driver, run it through Lindent. Lindent is not perfect, and you may have to do some minor cleanup, but it is a good start.
Ok. Thanks Roberto
thanks! Mimi+ if (rc) + break; + sizeof_pcr_selection = sizeof(pcr_selection.hash_alg) + sizeof(pcr_selection.size_of_select) + pcr_selection.size_of_select; diff --git a/include/linux/tpm.h b/include/linux/tpm.h index 4f00daf44dd2..3f91124837cf 100644 --- a/include/linux/tpm.h +++ b/include/linux/tpm.h @@ -46,6 +46,12 @@ struct tpm_digest { u8 digest[SHA512_DIGEST_SIZE]; } __packed;+struct tpm_bank_info {+ u16 alg_id; + u16 digest_size; + u16 crypto_id; +}; + enum TPM_OPS_FLAGS { TPM_OPS_AUTO_STARTUP = BIT(0), };
-- HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063 Managing Director: Bo PENG, Jian LI, Yanli SHI
