From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>,
Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: work around status register bug in STMicroelectronics TPM
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:25:20 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200421202520.GD46589@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1587479764.5149.27.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:36:04AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-04-20 at 15:28 -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-04-20 at 23:46 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > But more seriously: Nayna Jain did a series of patches improving the
> > time it takes to poll the TPM for operations precisely because the TPM
> > PCR extend was going so slowly:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20180516055125.5685-1-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com/
>
> The original reason for us needing to improve the TPM performance was
> due to the kernel scheduler change. Refer to commit a233a0289cf9
> ("tpm: msleep() delays - replace with usleep_range() in i2c nuvoton
> driver"). That scheduler change prevented systems from booting.
> Bisecting the kernel to figure out the problem wasn't very
> productive.
>
> At least any TPM changes that affect the TPM performance really need
> to take into account IMA requirements.
Thanks Mimi.
With my dynamic proposal it would work as it works now for system
where it worked anyway, and would fix the systems where timeouts
were too short.
/Jarkko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-21 20:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-15 22:45 [PATCH] tpm_tis: work around status register bug in STMicroelectronics TPM Omar Sandoval
2020-04-15 23:51 ` James Bottomley
2020-04-16 0:16 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-04-16 0:24 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-04-16 18:02 ` James Bottomley
2020-04-17 23:55 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-04-18 0:12 ` James Bottomley
2020-04-20 20:46 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-04-20 22:28 ` James Bottomley
2020-04-21 14:36 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-04-21 20:25 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2020-04-21 20:31 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-04-21 20:23 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-04-21 22:08 ` James Bottomley
2020-04-16 17:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-04-16 17:56 ` James Bottomley
2020-08-27 15:24 ` Jason Andryuk
2020-08-28 23:18 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-08-29 0:12 ` Jason Andryuk
2020-08-31 13:55 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-04 12:03 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-04-16 17:08 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-04-16 18:54 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-04-17 23:54 ` 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=20200421202520.GD46589@linux.intel.com \
--to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
--cc=zohar@linux.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.