Conversation
Jarkko Sakkinen
jarkko
Critical fixes for TPM2 authenticated sessions, which I still hope landing to 6.10:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240703170815.1494625-1-jarkko@kernel.org/
#tpm #linux #kernel
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240703170815.1494625-1-jarkko@kernel.org/
#tpm #linux #kernel
1
1
2
1
0
1
@kernellogger I.e. the symptom was correct but the proposed fix was not, and this is the correct way to fix the actual bug.
1
0
1
@kernellogger v2 with baseline fixed into mainline tip: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240703182453.1580888-1-jarkko@kernel.org/T/#t
1
0
1
@kernellogger Yep, thank you, coming from the Holiday to fix this ;-)
I released v3. The previous version was already fully working and confirmed by Stefan (on the basis that he got the expected log message).
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240704085708.661142-1-jarkko@kernel.org/T/#t
This version I'm likely going to put to a pull request for -rc7 today even without reviewed/tested-by tags because null deference needs to be addressed, there's no excuses not to do it. I'll hold for some hours but then I'll put the PR out.
On the other hand, we can wait "forever" for tpm_ibmvtpm have the feature fully enabled. That endangers the stability of total zero systems in the wild.
I released v3. The previous version was already fully working and confirmed by Stefan (on the basis that he got the expected log message).
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240704085708.661142-1-jarkko@kernel.org/T/#t
This version I'm likely going to put to a pull request for -rc7 today even without reviewed/tested-by tags because null deference needs to be addressed, there's no excuses not to do it. I'll hold for some hours but then I'll put the PR out.
On the other hand, we can wait "forever" for tpm_ibmvtpm have the feature fully enabled. That endangers the stability of total zero systems in the wild.
1
0
0
@kernellogger One more revision coming soon based on Linus' and James' feedback. I added you and Linus to the loop because the overall diff is not small, and this is coming quite late. Unfortunately, neither when bugs arrive and when they have been fully analyzed can be planned beforehand...
1
0
0
@kernellogger Put out a PR: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/D2HKE740MWCK.2O7S4KF56L929@kernel.org/
I did all three QA rounds running selftests, creating some trusted keys etc. for all three combinations mentioned in the cover letter, and also Michael Ellerman tested this on PPC so it should be pretty solid fix.
I did all three QA rounds running selftests, creating some trusted keys etc. for all three combinations mentioned in the cover letter, and also Michael Ellerman tested this on PPC so it should be pretty solid fix.
1
0
0
Jarkko Sakkinen
jarkko
@kernellogger np, it was on me :-) If I ack something, in the end of the day that's my responsibility, e.g. not even in original author's responsibility.
This is also main reason why people should not get offended if a maintainer does not take their changes in. It's also commitment for some extra work... even sometimes when you're on holiday ;-)
This is also main reason why people should not get offended if a maintainer does not take their changes in. It's also commitment for some extra work... even sometimes when you're on holiday ;-)
1
0
1
@kernellogger Also this is the reason why sometimes there should more emphasis on commit message than code change itself. Commit message is not only a notification that "I added this pile of crap here". It's also micro-instructions for maintainer how to take care of the changes in the future. In the case on this patch set, I have no complains on this.
0
0
1