From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05FC8C7619A for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 12:21:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229739AbjCWMVz (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:21:55 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58302 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231477AbjCWMVi (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:21:38 -0400 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [IPv6:2607:fcd0:100:8a00::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FC4627D73 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 05:20:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1679574033; bh=kYLZN8L512l8O3JwSJz8bPf2xfvhTMgM0pomg73LtYE=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=WcBRsCK/432+mSzWZA/sXHq18+3OoRd/YcczomDmy815OblGXL65NbrM38oyYSq+C g0RSo51cbAKfAxEk3fsvjAvfInLBv+ui578Gqr8bP+cvt2BC0jzD9JRz0frW8sBYGo V4PMtTkfiptwF0jSTsENlirrKOoL2009K8ms3L3Y= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E2C1285E12; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:20:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id PCrML0fDYFWH; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:20:32 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1679574032; bh=kYLZN8L512l8O3JwSJz8bPf2xfvhTMgM0pomg73LtYE=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MYI15VqRinh4Pck4hcOW/BVVDDgrE0y6YmF/ez16okyCDCdekqnqoRpsU+u/8Azeg bknDIYD3YBd+iOWvPHfLNXkLYZZv9Bi7HWutMM3gnJZwVq50uLw3zfaAx3dAAu7DFD o276Df/45FSDnDj8TcnJO/+e5fXEn6lJbOH6lc1o= Received: from [153.66.160.227] (unknown [153.66.160.227]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E70931281E14; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:20:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <2a8671aaae43738f45f7812a9e0d93a99c5ebc69.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: tpm: fix build break in tpm-chip.c caused by AMD fTPM quirk From: James Bottomley To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Mario Limonciello Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:20:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20230320134721.w7rcpk7ecbqvxrtg@kernel.org> References: <5cf966e97f9a0fabdf8d3b5a0cbae90abe484813.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20230320134721.w7rcpk7ecbqvxrtg@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2023-03-20 at 15:47 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 07:22:52AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Mon, 2023-03-20 at 07:15 -0400, James Bottomley wrote: > > > The test for the AMD fTPM problem, which just went in, actually > > > uses the wrong function template for request_locality().  It's > > > missing an argument so the build breaks: > > > > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c:568:8: error: too few arguments to > > > function ‘tpm_request_locality’ > > >   ret = tpm_request_locality(chip); > > >         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c:43:12: note: declared here > > >  static int tpm_request_locality(struct tpm_chip *chip, int > > > locality) > > >             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > Fix this by requesting zero locality. > > > > Actually, this is a bad interaction with the non-upstream patch to > > run the kernel in locality two to allow key policy to distinguish > > kernel release from user space release, which goes back to the > > debate over hibernation keys.  I'll carry it separately until (or > > if ever) we get a resolution on how to do this. > > BTW, do you have a newer version of > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20230216201410.15010-1-James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com/ > > I'm planning to flush testing queue as I have now more bandwidth > for TPM and keyring (actually I'm looking RISC-V fTPM's at work). Hopefully next week. I'm on a business trip and conference this week, so most of my cycles have been going into that and converting the TPM2 engine to a provider, but I'm back home next week and the provider conversion is pretty much done. Regards, James