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=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 A7E84C4321A for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 05:50:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CF592133F for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 05:50:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="VKNi1swU" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726882AbfF1Fua (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jun 2019 01:50:30 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com ([209.85.208.195]:36369 "EHLO mail-lj1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726566AbfF1Fu3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jun 2019 01:50:29 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id i21so4738774ljj.3 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 22:50:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cbFBRaRExGspP5FBHqiodiH1th1SFCHyj3/EvKVMOx0=; b=VKNi1swUOq5lK8dq5fqpEDERV76IAnNdVZ5XZGkHh0446kzeu1AUrTBtfcWnqjwz7s CFLCv+VQfnCjIW21Uxjhk9kIItpOCpOBVaNjc4RN6PTb/zpOPrs2Jj7LcyAqecc21QRV 2zT0yeebkvwCzjWi2Tq7+2u7CBR3i7VsePNdHChsH3C/xrJfBA9rwWPDAi8E7lXECpz8 Q1nuzUYvZIvaVHYYNFAHG986q7tr+zKqYG229xXRcT4HSClajfzb3LUyrKnMstHdN24Y IWVk/TCCmQCNkoJVw/Yul28cipc8m3F/AL+0q4ind6UeYydAvf+v66mhP8+vCEXX70QX +NNg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cbFBRaRExGspP5FBHqiodiH1th1SFCHyj3/EvKVMOx0=; b=EemIGuS3822lEfJyOtAoY/HA8tZ55bgK4zIBxfOfMDsDx8gfVvGHlflO6L+d2eQVEo Y+x4Bjv6DUcs6wRnnxYEYQkacoyaxjy6rRDRmZWQwo0VvHn99lTttu/2dyN9q9Eum3MK 759buPgWXopgqtklexKIqcCY4FFJUo17P7gBy0sQWuzd056f8SpA9u/QPAfnA+8Ku9aZ jM+pTcETYCLyOSxGt3WqjgeFoqW+jf/yGkPjSzanlRPmcGBjtE2pGpX7GCEmKCUpovwk gPlMjPrYZ0iNL+0bpMj2Gfc8lJt4siuXidMzKOHa9xfxF6RsdKLLnzuzuTMryDlnm2ba SORg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVcVg/ubf1Xr4xoO4KArVt6yYJPTjN4vyHRZQ3MyO4Bn4bg03FW /VW9YFtP+s+kNR0321+304MaK9iXC00nCV3yY3gk9w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyEmJlYN3SMPXRrWfgX1NnF/P7C1CPVt4Z22T7CZtmDkBsqof9nh+eUEiF4lozTqMf3BR8KLe04tRokqvKZ1VQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:4b12:: with SMTP id y18mr4842583lja.238.1561701027991; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 22:50:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190625201341.15865-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20190625201341.15865-2-sashal@kernel.org> <673dd30d03e8ed9825bb46ef21b2efef015f6f2a.camel@linux.intel.com> <20190626235653.GL7898@sasha-vm> In-Reply-To: From: Sumit Garg Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:20:16 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] fTPM: firmware TPM running in TEE To: Jarkko Sakkinen , Sasha Levin Cc: peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, corbet@lwn.net, Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, Microsoft Linux Kernel List , Thirupathaiah Annapureddy , "Bryan Kelly (CSI)" , tee-dev@lists.linaro.org, Ilias Apalodimas , rdunlap@infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Hi Jarkko and Sasha, On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 18:47, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 19:56 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > You've used so much on this so shouldn't this have that somewhat new > > > co-developed-by tag? I'm also wondering can this work at all > > > > Honestly, I've just been massaging this patch more than "authoring" it. > > If you feel strongly about it feel free to add a Co-authored patch with > > my name, but in my mind this is just Thiru's work. > > This is just my subjective view but writing code is easier than making > it work in the mainline in 99% of cases. If this patch was doing > something revolutional, lets say a new outstanding scheduling algorithm, > then I would think otherwise. It is not. You without question deserve > both credit and also the blame (if this breaks everything) :-) > > > > process-wise if the original author of the patch is also the only tester > > > of the patch? > > > > There's not much we can do about this... Linaro folks have tested this > > without the fTPM firmware, so at the very least it won't explode for > > everyone. If for some reason non-microsoft folks see issues then we can > > submit patches on top to fix this, we're not just throwing this at you > > and running away. > > So why any of those Linaro folks can't do it? I can add after tested-by > tag parentheses something explaining that context of testing. It is > reasonable given the circumstances. Simply because the hardware I have (Developerbox) doesn't provide enough flash space (as per current memory map) for this fTPM driver to be loaded as early TA along with OP-TEE binary. So I can't get any further point than sanity probe failure check for which I think a tested-by won't be appropriate. -Sumit > > I can also give an explanation in my next PR along the lines what you > are saying. This would definitely work for me. > > /Jarkko >