Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 22 Jan 2017 23:04:41 +0200 | From | Jarkko Sakkinen <> | Subject | Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 5/5] tpm2: expose resource manager via a device link /dev/tpms<n> |
| |
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:01:07PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 10:30:55PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 10:48:12AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 09:49 -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2017-01-20 at 23:05 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > 'tabrm4' branch has been now rebased. It's now on top of master > > > > > branch that contains Stefan's latest patch (min body length check) > > > > > that I've reviewed and tested. It also contains your updated > > > > > /dev/tpms patch. > > > > > > > > > > I guess the 5 commits that are there now are such that we have > > > > > fairly good consensus, don't we? If so, can I add your reviewed-by > > > > > and tested-by to my commits and vice versa? > > > > > > > > We're still failing my test_transients. This is the full python of > > > > the test case: > > > > > > > > > > > > def test_transients(self): > > > > k = self.open_transients() > > > > self.c.flush_context(k[0]) > > > > self.c.change_auth(self.c.SRK, k[1], None, pwd1) > > > > ... > > > > > > > > It's failing at self.c.flush_context(k[0]) with TPM_RC_VALUE. It's > > > > the same problem Ken complained about: TPM2_FlushContext doesn't have > > > > a declared handle area so we don't translate the handle being sent > > > > down. We have to fix this either by intercepting the flush and > > > > manually translating the context, or by being dangerously clever and > > > > marking flush as a command which takes one handle. > > > > > > This is what the dangerously clever fix looks like. With this and a > > > few other changes, my smoke tests now pass. > > > > > > James > > > > I don't want to be clever here. I will rather intercept the body and > > try to keep the core code simple and easy to understand. > > It came out quite clean actually. > > I just encapsulated handle mapping and have this in the beginning of > tpm2_map_command: > > if (cc == TPM2_CC_FLUSH_CONTEXT) > return tpm2_map_to_phandle(space, &cmd[TPM_HEADER_SIZE]); > > I think this documents better what is actually going on than tinkering > cc_attr_tbl. > > /Jarkko
Actually what you suggested is much better idea because it will also take care of validation. I'm still going to keep tpm2_map_to_phandle because it makes the code flow a lot cleaner and probably sessions have to anyway make it even more complicated.
/Jarkko
| |