All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <Alexander.Steffen@infineon.com>
To: <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
	<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>, <tpmdd@selhorst.net>,
	<jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>, <patrickc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:32:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <09fb75ce43fb4e50ac83df7ef9be57a4@infineon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e98e85a5-fec1-93fb-8daf-d997d5995993@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

> On 10/20/2017 08:12 PM, Alexander.Steffen@infineon.com wrote:
> >> The TPM burstcount status indicates the number of bytes that can
> >> be sent to the TPM without causing bus wait states.  Effectively,
> >> it is the number of empty bytes in the command FIFO.
> >>
> >> This patch optimizes the tpm_tis_send_data() function by checking
> >> the burstcount only once. And if the burstcount is valid, it writes
> >> all the bytes at once, permitting wait state.
> >>
> >> After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte
> >> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~41sec to ~14sec.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Ken Goldman<kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com>  in
> >> conjunction with the TPM Device Driver work group.
> >> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain<nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> Acked-by: Mimi Zohar<zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 42 +++++++++++++++------------------
> ----
> >> ----
> >>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> index b33126a35694..993328ae988c 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> @@ -316,7 +316,6 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip
> *chip,
> >> u8 *buf, size_t len)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct tpm_tis_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
> >>   	int rc, status, burstcnt;
> >> -	size_t count = 0;
> >>   	bool itpm = priv->flags & TPM_TIS_ITPM_WORKAROUND;
> >>
> >>   	status = tpm_tis_status(chip);
> >> @@ -330,35 +329,24 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip
> *chip,
> >> u8 *buf, size_t len)
> >>   		}
> >>   	}
> >>
> >> -	while (count < len - 1) {
> >> -		burstcnt = get_burstcount(chip);
> >> -		if (burstcnt < 0) {
> >> -			dev_err(&chip->dev, "Unable to read burstcount\n");
> >> -			rc = burstcnt;
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -		}
> >> -		burstcnt = min_t(int, burstcnt, len - count - 1);
> >> -		rc = tpm_tis_write_bytes(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv-
> >>> locality),
> >> -					 burstcnt, buf + count);
> >> -		if (rc < 0)
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -
> >> -		count += burstcnt;
> >> -
> >> -		if (wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip-
> >>> timeout_c,
> >> -					&priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
> >> -			rc = -ETIME;
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -		}
> >> -		status = tpm_tis_status(chip);
> >> -		if (!itpm && (status & TPM_STS_DATA_EXPECT) == 0) {
> >> -			rc = -EIO;
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -		}
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * Get the initial burstcount to ensure TPM is ready to
> >> +	 * accept data.
> >> +	 */
> >> +	burstcnt = get_burstcount(chip);
> >> +	if (burstcnt < 0) {
> >> +		dev_err(&chip->dev, "Unable to read burstcount\n");
> >> +		rc = burstcnt;
> >> +		goto out_err;
> >>   	}
> >>
> >> +	rc = tpm_tis_write_bytes(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv->locality),
> >> +			len - 1, buf);
> >> +	if (rc < 0)
> >> +		goto out_err;
> >> +
> >>   	/* write last byte */
> >> -	rc = tpm_tis_write8(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv->locality),
> >> buf[count]);
> >> +	rc = tpm_tis_write8(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv->locality), buf[len-
> >> 1]);
> >>   	if (rc < 0)
> >>   		goto out_err;
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.13.3
> > This seems to fail reliably with my SPI TPM 2.0. I get EIO when trying to
> send large amounts of data, e.g. with TPM2_Hash, and subsequent tests
> seem to take an unusual amount of time. More analysis probably has to wait
> until November, since I am going to be in Prague next week.
> 
> Thanks Alex for testing these.. Did you get the chance to do any further
> analysis ?

I am working on that now. Ken's suggestion seems reasonable, so I am going to test whether correctly waiting for the flags to change fixes the problem. If it does, I'll send the patches.

Alexander

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander.Steffen@infineon.com (Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:32:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <09fb75ce43fb4e50ac83df7ef9be57a4@infineon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e98e85a5-fec1-93fb-8daf-d997d5995993@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

> On 10/20/2017 08:12 PM, Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com wrote:
> >> The TPM burstcount status indicates the number of bytes that can
> >> be sent to the TPM without causing bus wait states.  Effectively,
> >> it is the number of empty bytes in the command FIFO.
> >>
> >> This patch optimizes the tpm_tis_send_data() function by checking
> >> the burstcount only once. And if the burstcount is valid, it writes
> >> all the bytes at once, permitting wait state.
> >>
> >> After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte
> >> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~41sec to ~14sec.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Ken Goldman<kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com>  in
> >> conjunction with the TPM Device Driver work group.
> >> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain<nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> Acked-by: Mimi Zohar<zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 42 +++++++++++++++------------------
> ----
> >> ----
> >>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> index b33126a35694..993328ae988c 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> >> @@ -316,7 +316,6 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip
> *chip,
> >> u8 *buf, size_t len)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct tpm_tis_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
> >>   	int rc, status, burstcnt;
> >> -	size_t count = 0;
> >>   	bool itpm = priv->flags & TPM_TIS_ITPM_WORKAROUND;
> >>
> >>   	status = tpm_tis_status(chip);
> >> @@ -330,35 +329,24 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip
> *chip,
> >> u8 *buf, size_t len)
> >>   		}
> >>   	}
> >>
> >> -	while (count < len - 1) {
> >> -		burstcnt = get_burstcount(chip);
> >> -		if (burstcnt < 0) {
> >> -			dev_err(&chip->dev, "Unable to read burstcount\n");
> >> -			rc = burstcnt;
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -		}
> >> -		burstcnt = min_t(int, burstcnt, len - count - 1);
> >> -		rc = tpm_tis_write_bytes(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv-
> >>> locality),
> >> -					 burstcnt, buf + count);
> >> -		if (rc < 0)
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -
> >> -		count += burstcnt;
> >> -
> >> -		if (wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip-
> >>> timeout_c,
> >> -					&priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
> >> -			rc = -ETIME;
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -		}
> >> -		status = tpm_tis_status(chip);
> >> -		if (!itpm && (status & TPM_STS_DATA_EXPECT) == 0) {
> >> -			rc = -EIO;
> >> -			goto out_err;
> >> -		}
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * Get the initial burstcount to ensure TPM is ready to
> >> +	 * accept data.
> >> +	 */
> >> +	burstcnt = get_burstcount(chip);
> >> +	if (burstcnt < 0) {
> >> +		dev_err(&chip->dev, "Unable to read burstcount\n");
> >> +		rc = burstcnt;
> >> +		goto out_err;
> >>   	}
> >>
> >> +	rc = tpm_tis_write_bytes(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv->locality),
> >> +			len - 1, buf);
> >> +	if (rc < 0)
> >> +		goto out_err;
> >> +
> >>   	/* write last byte */
> >> -	rc = tpm_tis_write8(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv->locality),
> >> buf[count]);
> >> +	rc = tpm_tis_write8(priv, TPM_DATA_FIFO(priv->locality), buf[len-
> >> 1]);
> >>   	if (rc < 0)
> >>   		goto out_err;
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.13.3
> > This seems to fail reliably with my SPI TPM 2.0. I get EIO when trying to
> send large amounts of data, e.g. with TPM2_Hash, and subsequent tests
> seem to take an unusual amount of time. More analysis probably has to wait
> until November, since I am going to be in Prague next week.
> 
> Thanks Alex for testing these.. Did you get the chance to do any further
> analysis ?

I am working on that now. Ken's suggestion seems reasonable, so I am going to test whether correctly waiting for the flags to change fixes the problem. If it does, I'll send the patches.

Alexander
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-08 11:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-17 20:32 [PATCH v4 0/4] additional TPM performance improvements Nayna Jain
2017-10-17 20:32 ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-17 20:32 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] tpm: move wait_for_tpm_stat() to respective driver files Nayna Jain
2017-10-17 20:32   ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-19 14:21   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 14:21     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 17:00     ` Alexander.Steffen
2017-10-19 17:00       ` Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com
2017-10-20  8:56       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-20  8:56         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-23 13:32         ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-23 13:32           ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-23 13:32           ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-24 13:45           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-24 13:45             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-17 20:32 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance Nayna Jain
2017-10-17 20:32   ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-18 15:25   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-18 15:25     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 14:23   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 14:23     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-20 14:42   ` Alexander.Steffen
2017-10-20 14:42     ` Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com
2017-10-20 18:02     ` Ken Goldman
2017-10-20 18:02       ` Ken Goldman
2017-10-23  2:57     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-23  2:57       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-07 18:29     ` Nayna Jain
2017-11-07 18:29       ` Nayna Jain
2017-11-07 18:29       ` Nayna Jain
2017-11-08 11:32       ` Alexander.Steffen [this message]
2017-11-08 11:32         ` Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com
2017-11-16 14:34       ` Alexander.Steffen
2017-11-16 14:34         ` Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com
2017-11-22  6:52       ` Alexander.Steffen
2017-11-22  6:52         ` Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com
2017-11-23 14:47         ` Nayna Jain
2017-11-23 14:47           ` Nayna Jain
2017-11-23 16:19           ` Alexander.Steffen
2017-11-23 16:19             ` Alexander.Steffen at infineon.com
2017-11-26 15:22           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-26 15:22             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-26 16:37             ` Mimi Zohar
2017-11-26 16:37               ` Mimi Zohar
2017-11-27  7:08               ` Leendert van Doorn
2017-11-27  7:08                 ` Leendert van Doorn
2017-11-27  7:08                 ` Leendert van Doorn
2017-11-27 13:22                 ` Mimi Zohar
2017-11-27 13:22                   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-11-27 13:22                   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-11-28 20:19                 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-28 20:19                   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-28 20:19                   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-17 20:32 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] tpm: reduce tpm polling delay in tpm_tis_core Nayna Jain
2017-10-17 20:32   ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-18 15:24   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-18 15:24     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 14:22     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 14:22       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-17 20:32 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] tpm: use tpm_msleep() value as max delay Nayna Jain
2017-10-17 20:32   ` Nayna Jain
2017-10-19 14:22   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-10-19 14:22     ` Jarkko Sakkinen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=09fb75ce43fb4e50ac83df7ef9be57a4@infineon.com \
    --to=alexander.steffen@infineon.com \
    --cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=patrickc@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
    --cc=tpmdd@selhorst.net \
    --cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.