On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 07:38:30PM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > On 12/5/2018 1:14 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 09:21:38AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > > The new tpm_bank_list structure has been preferred to the tpm_digest > > > structure, to let the caller specify the size of the digest (which may be > > > unknown to the TPM driver). > > > > Why is that? Didn't previous commit query these? > > Since the TPM driver pads/truncates the first digest passed by the > caller to extend PCRs for which no digest was provided, it must know > which amount of data it can use. It is possible that the algorithm of > the first digest is unknown for the TPM driver, if the caller of > tpm_pcr_extend() didn't check chip->allocated_banks. > > By requiring that the caller passes also the digest size, this problem > does not arise. It seems reasonable to me to pass this information, as > the caller calculated the digest and it should know the digest size. OK. I noticed something other things that look to alarming: 1. The function does not fail if alg_id is not found. This will go silent. 2. The function does not fail if there is a mismatch with the digest sizes. /Jarkko
