Rather than accessing the TPM functions by passing a NULL pointer for
the tpm_chip, which causes a lookup for a suitable chip every time, get a
hold of a tpm_chip and access the TPM functions using it. Also get rid of
the ima_used_chip variable and use the new ima_tpm_chip variable instead
for determining whether to call TPM functions.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <[email protected]>
---
security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 2 +-
security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c | 4 ++--
security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c | 16 +++++-----------
security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c | 4 ++--
4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
index 354bb5716ce3..2ab1affffa36 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
@@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ enum tpm_pcrs { TPM_PCR0 = 0, TPM_PCR8 = 8 };
extern int ima_policy_flag;
/* set during initialization */
-extern int ima_used_chip;
extern int ima_hash_algo;
extern int ima_appraise;
+extern struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip;
/* IMA event related data */
struct ima_event_data {
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
index 4e085a17124f..7e7e7e7c250a 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
@@ -631,10 +631,10 @@ int ima_calc_buffer_hash(const void *buf, loff_t len,
static void __init ima_pcrread(int idx, u8 *pcr)
{
- if (!ima_used_chip)
+ if (!ima_tpm_chip)
return;
- if (tpm_pcr_read(NULL, idx, pcr) != 0)
+ if (tpm_pcr_read(ima_tpm_chip, idx, pcr) != 0)
pr_err("Error Communicating to TPM chip\n");
}
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
index 29b72cd2502e..faac9ecaa0ae 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
/* name for boot aggregate entry */
static const char *boot_aggregate_name = "boot_aggregate";
-int ima_used_chip;
+struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip;
/* Add the boot aggregate to the IMA measurement list and extend
* the PCR register.
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static int __init ima_add_boot_aggregate(void)
iint->ima_hash->algo = HASH_ALGO_SHA1;
iint->ima_hash->length = SHA1_DIGEST_SIZE;
- if (ima_used_chip) {
+ if (ima_tpm_chip) {
result = ima_calc_boot_aggregate(&hash.hdr);
if (result < 0) {
audit_cause = "hashing_error";
@@ -106,17 +106,11 @@ void __init ima_load_x509(void)
int __init ima_init(void)
{
- u8 pcr_i[TPM_DIGEST_SIZE];
int rc;
- ima_used_chip = 0;
- rc = tpm_pcr_read(NULL, 0, pcr_i);
- if (rc == 0)
- ima_used_chip = 1;
-
- if (!ima_used_chip)
- pr_info("No TPM chip found, activating TPM-bypass! (rc=%d)\n",
- rc);
+ ima_tpm_chip = tpm_default_chip();
+ if (!ima_tpm_chip)
+ pr_info("No TPM chip found, activating TPM-bypass!\n");
rc = integrity_init_keyring(INTEGRITY_KEYRING_IMA);
if (rc)
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
index 418f35e38015..b186819bd5aa 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
@@ -142,10 +142,10 @@ static int ima_pcr_extend(const u8 *hash, int pcr)
{
int result = 0;
- if (!ima_used_chip)
+ if (!ima_tpm_chip)
return result;
- result = tpm_pcr_extend(NULL, pcr, hash);
+ result = tpm_pcr_extend(ima_tpm_chip, pcr, hash);
if (result != 0)
pr_err("Error Communicating to TPM chip, result: %d\n", result);
return result;
--
2.17.1
On Mon, 2018-07-02 at 11:24 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> Rather than accessing the TPM functions by passing a NULL pointer for
> the tpm_chip, which causes a lookup for a suitable chip every time, get a
> hold of a tpm_chip and access the TPM functions using it. Also get rid of
> the ima_used_chip variable and use the new ima_tpm_chip variable instead
> for determining whether to call TPM functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <[email protected]>
Jarkko, would you mind staging this patch with the rest of the patch
set?
Mimi
> ---
> security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 2 +-
> security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c | 4 ++--
> security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c | 16 +++++-----------
> security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c | 4 ++--
> 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> index 354bb5716ce3..2ab1affffa36 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> @@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ enum tpm_pcrs { TPM_PCR0 = 0, TPM_PCR8 = 8 };
> extern int ima_policy_flag;
>
> /* set during initialization */
> -extern int ima_used_chip;
> extern int ima_hash_algo;
> extern int ima_appraise;
> +extern struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip;
>
> /* IMA event related data */
> struct ima_event_data {
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> index 4e085a17124f..7e7e7e7c250a 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> @@ -631,10 +631,10 @@ int ima_calc_buffer_hash(const void *buf, loff_t len,
>
> static void __init ima_pcrread(int idx, u8 *pcr)
> {
> - if (!ima_used_chip)
> + if (!ima_tpm_chip)
> return;
>
> - if (tpm_pcr_read(NULL, idx, pcr) != 0)
> + if (tpm_pcr_read(ima_tpm_chip, idx, pcr) != 0)
> pr_err("Error Communicating to TPM chip\n");
> }
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> index 29b72cd2502e..faac9ecaa0ae 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
>
> /* name for boot aggregate entry */
> static const char *boot_aggregate_name = "boot_aggregate";
> -int ima_used_chip;
> +struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip;
>
> /* Add the boot aggregate to the IMA measurement list and extend
> * the PCR register.
> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static int __init ima_add_boot_aggregate(void)
> iint->ima_hash->algo = HASH_ALGO_SHA1;
> iint->ima_hash->length = SHA1_DIGEST_SIZE;
>
> - if (ima_used_chip) {
> + if (ima_tpm_chip) {
> result = ima_calc_boot_aggregate(&hash.hdr);
> if (result < 0) {
> audit_cause = "hashing_error";
> @@ -106,17 +106,11 @@ void __init ima_load_x509(void)
>
> int __init ima_init(void)
> {
> - u8 pcr_i[TPM_DIGEST_SIZE];
> int rc;
>
> - ima_used_chip = 0;
> - rc = tpm_pcr_read(NULL, 0, pcr_i);
> - if (rc == 0)
> - ima_used_chip = 1;
> -
> - if (!ima_used_chip)
> - pr_info("No TPM chip found, activating TPM-bypass! (rc=%d)\n",
> - rc);
> + ima_tpm_chip = tpm_default_chip();
> + if (!ima_tpm_chip)
> + pr_info("No TPM chip found, activating TPM-bypass!\n");
>
> rc = integrity_init_keyring(INTEGRITY_KEYRING_IMA);
> if (rc)
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
> index 418f35e38015..b186819bd5aa 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c
> @@ -142,10 +142,10 @@ static int ima_pcr_extend(const u8 *hash, int pcr)
> {
> int result = 0;
>
> - if (!ima_used_chip)
> + if (!ima_tpm_chip)
> return result;
>
> - result = tpm_pcr_extend(NULL, pcr, hash);
> + result = tpm_pcr_extend(ima_tpm_chip, pcr, hash);
> if (result != 0)
> pr_err("Error Communicating to TPM chip, result: %d\n", result);
> return result;
On Mon, 2018-07-02 at 13:00 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-07-02 at 11:24 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > Rather than accessing the TPM functions by passing a NULL pointer for
> > the tpm_chip, which causes a lookup for a suitable chip every time, get a
> > hold of a tpm_chip and access the TPM functions using it. Also get rid of
> > the ima_used_chip variable and use the new ima_tpm_chip variable instead
> > for determining whether to call TPM functions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <[email protected]>
>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <[email protected]>
>
> Jarkko, would you mind staging this patch with the rest of the patch
> set?
Yes, sure, I can do that. Any additional tag?
/Jarkko
On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 19:32 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-07-02 at 13:00 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-07-02 at 11:24 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > > Rather than accessing the TPM functions by passing a NULL pointer for
> > > the tpm_chip, which causes a lookup for a suitable chip every time, get a
> > > hold of a tpm_chip and access the TPM functions using it. Also get rid of
> > > the ima_used_chip variable and use the new ima_tpm_chip variable instead
> > > for determining whether to call TPM functions.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
> > > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <[email protected]>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <[email protected]>
> >
> > Jarkko, would you mind staging this patch with the rest of the patch
> > set?
>
> Yes, sure, I can do that. Any additional tag?
Thanks, just these.
Mimi
On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 08:10:03AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > Jarkko, would you mind staging this patch with the rest of the patch
> > > set?
> >
> > Yes, sure, I can do that. Any additional tag?
>
> Thanks, just these.
I pushed the changes to my tree (also next).
> Mimi
/Jarkko