lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Bad file pattern in MAINTAINERS section 'KEYS-TRUSTED'
    On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 07:25:17AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
    > On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 08:10 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
    > > Hi Jarrko,
    > >
    > > On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 13:37 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
    > > > Mimi,
    > > >
    > > > Can you fix this and I can ack and send PR through my tree?
    > >
    > > Making the "trusted.h" include file public was part of David's "KEYS:
    > > Support TPM-wrapped key and crypto ops" patch set. I wasn't involved
    > > in reviewing or upstreaming this patch set. As I recall, it was
    > > upstreamed rather quickly without much review. As it is TPM related,
    > > it should have at least been posted on the linux-integrity mailing
    > > list. I have no idea if "trusted.h" should have been made public.
    > >
    > > I'm not sure just "fixing" the MAINTAINERS file is the right
    > > solution. I was hoping to look at it later this week. Perhaps you
    > > and James could take a look?
    >
    > Looking at the contents of linux/keys/trusted.h, it looks like the
    > wrong decision to move it. The contents are way too improperly named
    > and duplicative to be in a standard header. It's mostly actually TPM
    > code including a redefinition of the tpm_buf structure, so it doesn't
    > even seem to be necessary for trusted keys.
    >
    > If you want to fix this as a bug, I'd move it back again, but long term
    > I think it should simply be combined with trusted.c because nothing
    > else can include it sanely anyway.

    <offtopic>
    Fully agree with the long term plan.

    I think it would be better to take the TPM2 trusted keys code from the
    driver to the keyring subsystem once TPM1 trusted keys code has been
    converted to use tpm_buf.

    I don't also know any good reason for the core TPM driver to be compiled
    as a module. It is just makes the kernel build configuration more
    awkward. Would be nice to get the TPM callable from any subsystem
    without fuzz. There is no a production use case for "TPM as an LKM"
    (obviously drivers for different types of TPM hardware must and will
    be compilable as LKM's).
    </offtopic>

    /Jarkko

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-03-27 05:57    [W:4.210 / U:0.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site