Re: [PATCH V5 2/4] tpm: Reserve the TPM final events table

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: "Matthew Garrett" <mjg59@google.com>,
	"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"Bartosz Szczepanek" <bsz@semihalf.com>,
	linux-integrity <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Peter Huewe" <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
	"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	"Roberto Sassu" <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"LSM List" <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Thiébaud Weksteen" <tweek@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/4] tpm: Reserve the TPM final events table
Date: Fri, 3 May 2019 09:12:09 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190503061209.GA5630@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190503060218.GA28048@gmail.com>

On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 08:02:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 12:15 AM Ard Biesheuvel
> > <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > (+ Ingo)
> > >
> > > On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 21:52, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 6:07 AM Bartosz Szczepanek <bsz@semihalf.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I may be a little late with this comment, but I've just tested these
> > > > > patches on aarch64 platform (from the top of jjs/master) and got
> > > > > kernel panic ("Unable to handle kernel read", full log at the end of
> > > > > mail). I think there's problem with below call to
> > > > > tpm2_calc_event_log_size(), where physical address of efi.tpm_log is
> > > > > passed as (void *) and never remapped:
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it looks like this is just broken. Can you try with the attached patch?
> > >
> > > I'm a bit uncomfortable with EFI code that is obviously broken and
> > > untested being queued for the next merge window in another tree.
> > 
> > The patchset was Cc:ed to linux-efi@. Is there anything else I should
> > have done to ensure you picked it up rather than Jarkko?
> 
> That's not the workflow rule the Linux kernel is using, if Cc:-ing a 
> patchset was the only condition for upstream inclusion then we'd have a 
> *LOT* of crap in the Linux kernel.
> 
> Just applying those EFI changes without even as much as an Acked-by from 
> the EFI maintainers is a *totally* unacceptable workflow.
> 
> Please revert/rebase and re-try this on the proper submission channels.
> 
> Meanwhile the broken code is NAK-ed by me:
> 
>    Nacked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

There must be some kind of misconception here. None of the changes have
been submitted so far. They are only in my master branch. They briefly
went to linux-next through my next branch but as soon as issues were
reported I wiped them off from there (which happened like 2-3 weeks
ago). They haven't been part off any of my PR's.

There is nothing to revert.

/Jarkko