All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>
Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
	Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@selhorst.net>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: fix byte order related arithmetic inconsistency in tpm_getcap()
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:34:58 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170510123458.fh3ef3c55y2wiu35@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170509151308.GA13586@obsidianresearch.com>

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 09:13:08AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 05:13:53PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 08:50:02PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > You should not do arithmetic with __be32 or __le32 types because
> > > sometimes it results incorrect results. Calculations must be done only
> > > with integers that are in in the CPU byte order. This commit migrates
> > > tpm_getcap() to struct tpm_buf in order to sort out these issues.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > > Now this should work as Robertos patches move byte order conversion
> > > where it should be. Sadly I'm out of reach to my Dell E6400 laptop
> > > that I use for TPM 1.2 testing.
> > >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++--------------
> > >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h           | 13 -------------
> > >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> > 
> > I've now tested this with TPM 1.2. Any complains?
> 
> Seems reasonable, but which linke had the problematic arithmetic?
> 
> Jason

Arithmetic should work but it's not a good practice to do additions,
substractions or multiplications in any other byte order than the CPU
byte order.

sparse also complains about this.

/Jarkko

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com (Jarkko Sakkinen)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] tpm: fix byte order related arithmetic inconsistency in tpm_getcap()
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:34:58 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170510123458.fh3ef3c55y2wiu35@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170509151308.GA13586@obsidianresearch.com>

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 09:13:08AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 05:13:53PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 08:50:02PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > You should not do arithmetic with __be32 or __le32 types because
> > > sometimes it results incorrect results. Calculations must be done only
> > > with integers that are in in the CPU byte order. This commit migrates
> > > tpm_getcap() to struct tpm_buf in order to sort out these issues.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > > Now this should work as Robertos patches move byte order conversion
> > > where it should be. Sadly I'm out of reach to my Dell E6400 laptop
> > > that I use for TPM 1.2 testing.
> > >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++--------------
> > >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h           | 13 -------------
> > >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> > 
> > I've now tested this with TPM 1.2. Any complains?
> 
> Seems reasonable, but which linke had the problematic arithmetic?
> 
> Jason

Arithmetic should work but it's not a good practice to do additions,
substractions or multiplications in any other byte order than the CPU
byte order.

sparse also complains about this.

/Jarkko
--
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:[~2017-05-10 12:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-07 17:50 [PATCH] tpm: fix byte order related arithmetic inconsistency in tpm_getcap() Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-07 17:50 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-07 17:50 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-09 14:13 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-09 14:13   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-09 15:13   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-05-09 15:13     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-05-10 12:34     ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2017-05-10 12:34       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-10 23:41       ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-05-10 23:41         ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-05-11 10:16         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-11 10:16           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-15 11:36       ` [tpmdd-devel] " Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-15 11:36         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-15 15:39         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-05-15 15:39           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-05-24 16:59           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-24 16:59             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-05-24 16:59             ` [tpmdd-devel] " 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=20170510123458.fh3ef3c55y2wiu35@intel.com \
    --to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
    --cc=tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=tpmdd@selhorst.net \
    /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.