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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 B5620C433FF for ; Sun, 4 Aug 2019 16:12:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9564D2070D for ; Sun, 4 Aug 2019 16:12:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726394AbfHDQMg (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Aug 2019 12:12:36 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com ([209.85.128.68]:38642 "EHLO mail-wm1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726181AbfHDQMg (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Aug 2019 12:12:36 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id s15so49452660wmj.3 for ; Sun, 04 Aug 2019 09:12:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VanA4arzx1pKLCBPTthhxDPqngslBUn68r1ZMhO+zus=; b=jeZx+bohmvcz1jT5o6SFnkp1AaCdK+6BJlUJtGD3KSt+dT+XnnFz30swU/c04vU30M 6uB2ELLZ1t59ImFIghv6IiQH+L0fBJ+9J2AjL07P+8ebp6PWKzy6quG3bnJEU+cSmW1R ghzFYcNVNiuNBooXV3WNTU+bFhuF/ADSM7WdVw7DIN/+/1TUf0Z9dawsriW4DNsZYeBH uxYdupr5vbWmtDPuRfoRlr/LyJwWHzYUX0pbx8Zq5W5TqxEImXycgVvfU3ESe609jQWl II7CgDpCUz3hH2Yb7olEbZwWQnA8noz0IN+SKHD4h9zob0m1Enj0Z3siUcK6MeN2zgHk q3CQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUpUFjkxkCDHRkvpg89xRb8UHRYWjMPR1A6R+0OGJ3FsbFT8YbS ZmTQNByQiv1a1r28R21szhtbbg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyui6X2NxaOd0H8eIaOJhvyabkDxZbqr3kyLDs9QTwtaV3BSwC3mF1xdmSMEORCyA02T/5PyA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:480a:: with SMTP id v10mr14240302wma.120.1564935154008; Sun, 04 Aug 2019 09:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shalem.localdomain (84-106-84-65.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl. [84.106.84.65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c7sm74215923wro.70.2019.08.04.09.12.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 04 Aug 2019 09:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: 5.3 boot regression caused by 5.3 TPM changes To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Matthew Garrett , Jarkko Sakkinen , Peter Huewe , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , linux-integrity , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-efi References: From: Hans de Goede Message-ID: Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 18:12:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 04-08-19 17:33, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 13:00, Hans de Goede wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> While testing 5.3-rc2 on an Irbis TW90 Intel Cherry Trail based >> tablet I noticed that it does not boot on this device. >> >> A git bisect points to commit 166a2809d65b ("tpm: Don't duplicate >> events from the final event log in the TCG2 log") >> >> And I can confirm that reverting just that single commit makes >> the TW90 boot again. >> >> This machine uses AptIO firmware with base component versions >> of: UEFI 2.4 PI 1.3. I've tried to reproduce the problem on >> a Teclast X80 Pro which is also CHT based and also uses AptIO >> firmware with the same base components. But it does not reproduce >> there. Neither does the problem reproduce on a CHT tablet using >> InsideH20 based firmware. >> >> Note that these devices have a software/firmware TPM-2.0 >> implementation, they do not have an actual TPM chip. >> >> Comparing TPM firmware setting between the 2 AptIO based >> tablets the settings are identical, but the troublesome >> TW90 does have some more setting then the X80, it has >> the following settings which are not shown on the X80: >> >> Active PCR banks: SHA-1 (read only) >> Available PCR banks: SHA-1,SHA256 (read only) >> TPM2.0 UEFI SPEC version: TCG_2 (other possible setting: TCG_1_2 >> Physical Presence SPEC ver: 1.2 (other possible setting: 1.3) >> >> I have the feeling that at least the first 2 indicate that >> the previous win10 installation has actually used the >> TPM, where as on the X80 the TPM is uninitialized. >> Note this is just a hunch I could be completely wrong. >> >> I would be happy to run any commands to try and debug this >> or to build a kernel with some patches to gather more info. >> >> Note any kernel patches to printk some debug stuff need >> to be based on 5.3 with 166a2809d65b reverted, without that >> reverted the device will not boot, and thus I cannot collect >> logs without it reverted. >> > > Are you booting a 64-bit kernel on 32-bit firmware? Yes you are right, I must say that this is somewhat surprising most Cherry Trail devices do use 64 bit firmware (where as Bay Trail typically uses 32 bit). But I just checked efibootmgr output and it says it is booting: \EFI\FEDORA\SHIMIA32.EFI so yeah 32 bit firmware. Recent Fedora releases take care of this so seamlessly I did not even realize... Regards, Hans