lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] tpm: ibmvtpm: Avoid error message when process gets signal while waiting
From
Date

On 7/29/21 8:57 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 09:39:18AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
>> On 7/28/21 5:50 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:00:51PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>>> On 7/26/21 10:42 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 12:25:05PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>>>>> From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When rngd is run as root then lots of these types of message will appear
>>>>>> in the kernel log if the TPM has been configure to provide random bytes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ 7406.275163] tpm tpm0: tpm_transmit: tpm_recv: error -4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue is caused by the following call that is interrupted while
>>>>>> waiting for the TPM's response.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sig = wait_event_interruptible(ibmvtpm->wq,
>>>>>> !ibmvtpm->tpm_processing_cmd);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The solution is to use wait_event() instead.
>>>>> Why?
>>>> So it becomes uninterruptible and these error messages go away.
>>> We do not want to make a process uninterruptible. That would prevent
>>> killing it.
>> I guess we'll have to go back to this one then:
>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-integrity/msg16741.html
> Makes a heck lot more sense.
>
> There's a typo in the commit message: PM_STATUS_BUSY
>
> Also the commit message lacks explanation of this change completely:
>
> @@ -690,8 +688,15 @@ static int tpm_ibmvtpm_probe(struct vio_dev *vio_dev,
> goto init_irq_cleanup;
> }
>
> - if (!strcmp(id->compat, "IBM,vtpm20")) {
> +
> + if (!strcmp(id->compat, "IBM,vtpm20"))
> chip->flags |= TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2;
> +
> + rc = tpm_get_timeouts(chip);
> + if (rc)
> + goto init_irq_cleanup;
> +
> + if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) {
> rc = tpm2_get_cc_attrs_tbl(chip);
>
> The last paragraph should be rewritten in imperative form.


will fix.

>
> Finally, you could simplify the fix by simply changing the type of
> tpm_processing_cmd to u8, and just set it to 'true' and 'false',
> which will set the first bit.

Are you sure? It's a bit mask we are using this with. Using 'true' for
these type of operations doesn't sound right.

        u8 status = chip->ops->status(chip);
        if ((status & chip->ops->req_complete_mask) ==
            chip->ops->req_complete_val)

            goto out_recv;

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c#L108

@@ -457,7 +455,7 @@ static const struct tpm_class_ops tpm_ibmvtpm = {
.send = tpm_ibmvtpm_send,
.cancel = tpm_ibmvtpm_cancel,
.status = tpm_ibmvtpm_status,
- .req_complete_mask = 0,
+ .req_complete_mask = TPM_STATUS_BUSY,
.req_complete_val = 0,
.req_canceled = tpm_ibmvtpm_req_canceled,
};

Stefan

>
> /Jarkko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-30 13:46    [W:0.071 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site