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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018B6C433DF for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 01:00:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83E220888 for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 01:00:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dell.com header.i=@dell.com header.b="GBg3FuEO" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725958AbgE1BAG (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 21:00:06 -0400 Received: from mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com ([148.163.137.20]:21224 "EHLO mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725896AbgE1BAF (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 21:00:05 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0170395.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 04S0eRbZ025288; Wed, 27 May 2020 21:00:03 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dell.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=smtpout1; bh=+3uSdHvQwkmHL6i8+LhKbMgUCjfZhlvm4doQtcLS8D0=; b=GBg3FuEOVEGQ/M9ftgjdPbO6cFYvt8vAhUGaJri1t4DsSn+Lwfjb6vE2Y/mGZeL6ea9f NmHrd33l7IehI8EK+oj12TylV8he3qPplzNczjaw+Szp8WltrlP0QTSJ9n15f2WqQNAe oAtY47dPI26DDK3Ljfir8zWA/s/7btCo4ZgLm4R/7s/fn2K6qq0D7fKJgmk57IZPwrEb QcAyBuHTmcMvtde0k96QIwVC7D2ioUKW+5YXUx9ECG/LKU49yFIlKTP98w9L3wetHpIl 4NxkgPOzR5ZSRdjciytLDhQFxZpchTxp58D+cufj0hQ1/UdZ8at2qLFS/j3+PjZBGWLX IQ== Received: from mx0a-00154901.pphosted.com (mx0a-00154901.pphosted.com [67.231.149.39]) by mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3170gpwqn7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 May 2020 21:00:03 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0090351.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00154901.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 04S0bYUV190944; Wed, 27 May 2020 21:00:02 -0400 Received: from ausxippc106.us.dell.com (AUSXIPPC106.us.dell.com [143.166.85.156]) by mx0b-00154901.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3192pyjsy8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 27 May 2020 21:00:02 -0400 X-LoopCount0: from 10.166.132.130 X-PREM-Routing: D-Outbound X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,349,1549951200"; d="scan'208";a="553281693" From: To: CC: , , , , , , , , Subject: RE: [PATCH] tpm: Revert "tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode" Thread-Topic: [PATCH] tpm: Revert "tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode" Thread-Index: AQHWM4wIzxc0OpiDwkyMUhr0qx5qZ6i7EGkA//+sw5CAAFoVAIABmusA//+ulgCAAJ4ZgP//r/6A Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 00:59:59 +0000 Message-ID: <7072116bf16a45bca62913e7d8a0354e@AUSX13MPC105.AMER.DELL.COM> References: <20200526183213.20720-1-mario.limonciello@dell.com> <1590520454.11810.40.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1590521924.15108.1.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <37da2695fe6de09d69e27b77f3e29e068596205f.camel@linux.intel.com> <4d1a53596af44c7b84f97aa4ce04a53c@AUSX13MPC105.AMER.DELL.COM> <20200528004355.GA5877@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20200528004355.GA5877@linux.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: msip_labels: MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Enabled=True; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_SiteId=945c199a-83a2-4e80-9f8c-5a91be5752dd; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Owner=Mario_Limonciello@Dell.com; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_SetDate=2020-05-28T00:59:58.3254510Z; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Name=External Public; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Application=Microsoft Azure Information Protection; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_ActionId=f9ec88c4-bdce-4173-af67-ac7216e71ca5; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Extended_MSFT_Method=Manual x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [143.166.24.60] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216,18.0.687 definitions=2020-05-27_03:2020-05-27,2020-05-27 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2005280001 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2005280001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] >=20 > What is this? Something my employer's mail system automatically tags in external email. My mistakes in forgetting to remove it on the response. >=20 > > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 12:38 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 19:23 +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com wrote= : > > > > > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 13:32 -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > > > > > > > This reverts commit d23d12484307b40eea549b8a858f5fffad913897. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit has caused regressions for the XPS 9560 containin= g > > > > > > > a Nuvoton TPM. > > > > > > > > > > > > Presumably this is using the tis driver? > > > > > > > > > > Correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > As mentioned by the reporter all TPM2 commands are failing wi= th: > > > > > > > ERROR:tcti:src/tss2-tcti/tcti- > > > > > > > device.c:290:tcti_device_receive() > > > > > > > Failed to read response from fd 3, got errno 1: Operation n= ot > > > > > > > permitted > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reporter bisected this issue back to this commit which wa= s > > > > > > > backported to stable as commit 4d6ebc4. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the problem is request_locality ... for some inexplicab= le > > > > > > reason a failure there returns -1, which is EPERM to user space= . > > > > > > > > > > > > That seems to be a bug in the async code since everything else > > > > > > gives a ESPIPE error if tpm_try_get_ops fails ... at least no-o= ne > > > > > > assumes it gives back a sensible return code. > > > > > > > > > > > > What I think is happening is that with the patch the TPM goes > > > > > > through a quick sequence of request, relinquish, request, > > > > > > relinquish and it's the third request which is failing (likely > > > > > > timing out). Without the patch, the patch there's only one > > > > > > request,relinquish cycle because the ops are held while the asy= nc > > > > > > work is executed. I have a vague recollection that there is a > > > > > > problem with too many locality request in quick succession, but > > > > > > I'll defer to Jason, who I think understands the intricacies of > > > > > > localities better than I do. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, I don't pretend to understand the nuances of this particu= lar > > > > > code, but I was hoping that the request to revert got some attent= ion > > > > > since Alex's kernel Bugzilla and message a few months ago to linu= x > > > > > integrity weren't. > > > > > > > > > > > If that's the problem, the solution looks simple enough: just m= ove > > > > > > the ops get down because the priv state is already protected by= the > > > > > > buffer mutex > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, if that works for Alex's situation it certainly sounds like= a > > > > > better solution than reverting this patch as this patch actually = does > > > > > fix a problem reported by Jeffrin originally. > > > > > > > > > > Could you propose a specific patch that Alex and Jeffrin can perh= aps > > > > > both try? > > > > > > > > Um, what's wrong with the one I originally attached and which you q= uote > > > > below? It's only compile tested, but I think it will work, if the > > > > theory is correct. > > > > > > Please send a legit patch, thanks. > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > Jarkko, > > > > After the confirmation from Alex that this patch attached to the end of= the > thread > > worked, James did send a proper patch that can be accessed here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux- > integrity/20200527155800.ya43xm2ltuwduwjg@cantor/T/#t > > > > Thanks, >=20 > Hi thanks a lot! I did read the full discussions and agree with the > conclusions as I get a patch in proper form. >=20 > Please ping next time a bit earlier. It's not that I don't want to deal > with the issues quickly as possible. It's probably just that I've forgot > something or missed. >=20 > /Jarkko Thanks! I completely forgot about it too, it was mentioned to me right after holida= ys and I forgot to follow up and see that it got sorted.