On Wed Jul 3, 2024 at 2:57 AM EEST, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 02:48 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Mon, 2024-07-01 at 15:14 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote: > > > Applying it is probably the better path forward than restricting HMAC to > > > x86_64 now and enabling it on a per-architecture basis afterwards ... > > > > Why is this here and not in the associated patch? > > > > Any, what argue against is already done for v6.10. > > > > The actual bug needs to be fixed before anything > > else. > > > > I can look at the patch when in August (back from > > holiday) but please response to the correct patch > > next time, thanks. > > Next steps forward: > > 1 Comment out sessions_init(). > 2. See what happens on x86 in QEMU. > 3. All errors were some sort size errors, so look into failing > sites and fixup the use of hmac shenanigans. For anything "fast" or "quick" I think this really the only possible sane thing to do right now: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240703003033.19057-1-jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#u There's also bunch of other drivers than tpm_ibmvtpm so better to limit it to known good drivers. I can take at the actual issue in August and will review any possible patches then. This one I'll send after my current PR for TPM has been merged. BR, Jarkko
