Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932520AbaJVKGU (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 06:06:20 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:38873 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754929AbaJVKGS (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 06:06:18 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,768,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="593652727" Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:05:33 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Peter Huewe , Ashley Lai , Marcel Selhorst , tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: fix multiple race conditions in tpm_ppi.c Message-ID: <20141022100533.GA31487@intel.com> References: <1413879761-25392-1-git-send-email-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20141021165551.GA28382@obsidianresearch.com> <20141021204251.GA5438@intel.com> <20141021210215.GA31755@obsidianresearch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141021210215.GA31755@obsidianresearch.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:02:15PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:42:51PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > Personally, I'd sequence this commit right after your 'tpm: two-phase > > > chip management functions' commit because it makes it much saner (no > > > half step toward the new functions). I assume this is a theoretical > > > problem? Or do you have a two TPM system? > > > > This has realized in Intel NUCs where there is PTT and dTPM module. Even > > when PTT is selected there is still ACPI device for dTPM so three is a > > race condition and PPI is unusable. I think that it's not good that code is > > not robust enough to deal with this. > > Oh OK, you should probably explain in the commit log that this is a > bug fix that impacts real hardware, that qualifies it for the -stable > tree. > > Assuming two-phase commit is nearly ready to go, I'd still sequence > this fix after two-phase for mainline and then use this patch as-is > for the 3.17 -stable backport of the mainline commit. OK, makes sense. I'll try to get this done tonight. > > Even if you forget the race condition it feels waste to lookup a handle > > that is already known. > > There is no doubt that this new arrangement is much better than what > was there before! > > Thanks, > Jason /Jarkko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/