On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 18:10 -0700, Alex Guzman wrote: > On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 23:15 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 19:23 +0000, Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx > > wrote: > > > Thanks, I don't pretend to understand the nuances of this > > > particular code, but I was hoping that the request to revert got > > > some attention since Alex's kernel Bugzilla and message a few > > > months ago to linux integrity weren't. > > > > Removing linux-kernel from CC since this subsystem internal > > discussion. > > > > Seeing the whole thing first time today. > > > > Bugzilla is the first thing to ignore when busy. It is good as > > place holder for bugs, but all discussions should happen only in > > LKML. There's no official requirement to proactively use Bugzilla > > for anything. > > > > That said I'm happy that people put stuff there so that it gets > > logged. > > > > For follow-up's use only LKML if it is important to you. Those will > > get processed. > > > > As far as this goes, if nothing is heard from me, check that you > > put me as CC to the original email. Otherwise, I might have missed > > it (by mistake, not by purpose). > > > > Honestly, I'm not sure what point was this patch when there was > > time to wait for months without response. Why the passivity for all > > this time? > > > > /Jarkko > > > > It largely went quiet because I didn't raise the issue in the mailing > list again. I pinged back in February ( > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/CAJ7- > PMbujee92N1f9xVF8vtXgS49qpe7qHkeWh1Z0R-Rk-Jkaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/) but > the conversation died out and I was content to simply use the > last working kernel version and see if the bug was resolved on its > own. I think its just a state of knowledge problem: back in February I didn't know how unusual EPERM errors are in the TPM so the issue just flew by as a "this is a curious issue with an O_NONBLOCK path" thing, but thanks to some key stuff I've been doing I now do. So this time your EPERM struck me as "that's impossible surely" which is why I dug into the code to find out where it was coming from ... and sure enough, it was impossible: it was an untranslated failure return, but at least it accidentally told me exactly what the real error was. So the upshot is you got lucky this time around ... James > I raised the issue again on the bugtracker a few days ago, leading to > this follow up here. :)
