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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=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 64098C433E1 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3E8206CB for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729340AbgGFOno (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2020 10:43:44 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:4210 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729148AbgGFOnn (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2020 10:43:43 -0400 IronPort-SDR: RfJvrGTT0TFtRYHNgdph164Lgc1zyM1OkmGMdIlwmfNpN8p9YzvV6ZsYNFVoAOjQonEYSN5CRG M7eFPfj7p9Hg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9673"; a="148921274" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,320,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="148921274" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jul 2020 07:43:35 -0700 IronPort-SDR: B7wzW+4RZNwjwI5xkTHLyytaxQfZtishRJfg2jZCfH85zjjwfvZqpNZ5mYaVARs8y9CCr4YWXI 8Ka4sXCi485w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,320,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="267935839" Received: from jwatson1-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.252.40.237]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Jul 2020 07:43:30 -0700 Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 17:43:28 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Peter.Huewe@infineon.com Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, kjhall@us.ibm.com, ferry.toth@elsinga.info, peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tpm_tis: Remove the HID IFX0102 Message-ID: <20200706144328.GA6956@linux.intel.com> References: <20200625023111.270458-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20200706140051.GB3816@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200706140051.GB3816@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 05:00:51PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 11:46:46AM +0000, Peter.Huewe@infineon.com wrote: > > Hi, > > NACK > > > > > % git --no-pager grep IFX0102 drivers/char/tpm > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_infineon.c: {"IFX0102", 0}, > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c: {"IFX0102", 0}, /* Infineon */ > > > Obviously IFX0102 was added to the HID table for the TCG TIS driver by mistake. > > > > The HID IFX0102 was NOT added by mistake. > > Let me explain the history a bit: > > > > Old SLB 9635 / 9630 TPMs had two ways to interface them > > - proprietary 'io' mapped protocol (tpm_infineon) - tis protocol (tpm_tis) > > > > Both match the same HID. > > However with the emerging of the tis protocol, the io protocol eventually went away for newer products. > > So all TPM1.2 by IFX match the HID0102 and the TCG generic ones PNP0C31 > > > > So basically you break TPM1.2 support for all (newer) Infineon chips if the platform vendor used the IFX0102 HID as they would speak via tpm_infineon driver. > > The bug must be something different, especially as it only seems to happen after suspend resume. > > Peter, > > Looking at dmesg: > > 1. tmp_infineon initializes cleanly > 2. tpm_tis fails misserably with bunch error messages > > I'm cool with reverting the patch though. Please send a revert patch and > explain this in the commit message because right now what you are saying > is completely undocumented. > > Also, this tpm_infineon issue needs to be fixed properly after the > revert. > > The bugzilla bug is unrelated to this issue but it causes extra harm > fixing any bugs and confusion among the users as the bug discussions > proves. > > How do we get the quirks for tpm_tis and tpm_infineon so that they can > separate each other? Also in the revert commit, please add a comment to tpm_tis.c about the existing conflict, e.g. /* * Legacy Infineon devices can emit illegit warnings as tpm_tis and * tpm_infineon have a conflicting device ID IFX0102. */ I'm cool reverting it as long as I get a patch with the required premises to do so and proper documentation, because the issue is still real. /Jarkko