From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933667AbdABVKJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jan 2017 16:10:09 -0500 Received: from quartz.orcorp.ca ([184.70.90.242]:55442 "EHLO quartz.orcorp.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932670AbdABVKA (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jan 2017 16:10:00 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 14:09:53 -0700 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Peter Huewe , Marcel Selhorst , open list Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/4] tpm: add the infrastructure for TPM space for TPM 2.0 Message-ID: <20170102210953.GB5544@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20170102132213.22880-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20170102132213.22880-5-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170102132213.22880-5-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 03:22:10PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > Added a ioctl for creating a TPM space. The space is isolated from the > other users of the TPM. Only a process holding the file with the handle > can access the objects and only objects that are created through that > file handle can be accessed. I don't understand this comment. /dev/tpmX is forced to be single-process-open, so how can there ever be more than 1 FD for it? Since the space is tied to that single fd these patches just create a way for the single user-space process to auto-cleanup if it crashes? Is that the entire intent of this design? I guess it is OK as a stepping point.. > -ssize_t tpm_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, const u8 *buf, size_t bufsiz, > - unsigned int flags) > +ssize_t tpm_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, struct tpm_space *space, > + u8 *buf, size_t bufsiz, unsigned int flags) Please split this patch so that 'struct tpm_space' introduction is in its own patch and the actual UAPI change is in a much smaller patch. It is very hard to see the uapi stuff in all of this churn. Jason