Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 19 Nov 2018 15:49:56 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Michael =?iso-8859-1?Q?Niew=F6hner?= <linux@mniewoehner.de>
Cc:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
        peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, arnd@arndb.de,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Nuvoton NCPT650 TPM 2.0 mode not working
Message-ID: <20181119134956.GD8755@linux.intel.com>
References: <1541962653.3190.7.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <7d8cc5ad4bb7548d283f363de6f24c90d5d0a2b2.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <1541968191.3190.12.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <3243d0325b3ea5878d3f86b0ee4fec1498f21dc1.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <660b0934bc16c8d195a2724f8be4ba8dfbe71134.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <1541972556.3734.90.camel@linux.ibm.com>
 <4f7cc7152f2266d8d0782889db2375d4c1c71987.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <b89c95a496a1512ee3069b6a69cf915906fe697a.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <20181118081833.GH5897@linux.intel.com>
 <467833cc47247a55595d72426f46eeac1406eb04.camel@mniewoehner.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <467833cc47247a55595d72426f46eeac1406eb04.camel@mniewoehner.de>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 03:10:06PM +0100, Michael Niew?hner wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 10:18 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:06:28PM +0100, Michael Niew?hner wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-11-14 at 21:46 +0100, Michael Niew?hner wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > 
> > > > I tried that patch mentioned by Mimi but it does not change anything for
> > > > me.
> > > > 
> > > > Then I did some more tests with different kernel configs and finally got
> > > > TPM
> > > > working by
> > > > a) compiling TPM as modules and rmmod tpm* and re-modprobe tpm_tis.
> > > > 
> > > > (initramfs) dmesg | grep -i tpm
> > > > [    0.000000] efi:  ACPI 2.0=0x9ea7e000 ACPI=0x9ea7e000 SMBIOS=0x9f5eb000
> > > > SMBIOS 3.0=0x9f5ea000 ESRT=0x9c07d918 MEMATTR=0x9bea3018
> > > > TPMEventLog=0x97cbb018
> > > > [    0.003793] ACPI: TPM2 0x000000009EAB7F70 000034 (v03 LENOVO TC-
> > > > S06   00001260 AMI 00000000)
> > > > (initramfs) rmmod tpm_crb tpm_tis tpm_tis_core tpm
> > > > (initramfs) modprobe tpm_tis
> > > > [   44.956905] tpm_tis MSFT0101:00: 2.0 TPM (device-id 0xFE, rev-id 2)
> > > > 
> > > > b) compiling TPM-support in-kernel and manually bind the ACPI device
> > > > 
> > > > (initramfs) dmesg | grep -i tpm
> > > > [    0.000000] efi: ACPI 2.0=0x9ea7e000 ACPI=0x9ea7e000 SMBIOS=0x9f5eb000
> > > > SMBIOS
> > > > 3.0=0x9f5ea000 ESRT=0x9c07d918 MEMATTR=0x9bea3018 TPMEventLog=0x97cbb018
> > > > [    0.003546] ACPI: TPM2 0x000000009EAB7F70 000034 (v03 LENOVO TC-S06
> > > > 00001260
> > > > AMI 00000000)
> > > > (initramfs) echo MSFT0101:00 >/sys/bus/platform/drivers/tpm_tis/bind
> > > > [  233.076079] tpm_tis MSFT0101:00: 2.0 TPM (device-id 0xFE, rev-id 2)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It seems to me, the kernel tries to enable the TPM to early...
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Michael
> > > 
> > > Looks like the manual driver bind works more or less but e.g reading hwrng
> > > does
> > > not work...
> > > 
> > > # echo MSFT0101:00 >/sys/bus/platform/drivers/tpm_tis/bind
> > > [  148.293302] tpm_tis MSFT0101:00: 2.0 TPM (device-id 0xFE, rev-id 2)
> > > # cat /sys/devices/virtual/misc/hw_random/rng_current
> > > tpm-rng-0
> > > # cat /dev/hwrng >/dev/null 
> > > cat: /dev/hwrng: Operation not permitted
> > 
> > Can you check with trace-cmd start -p function -l 'tpm*'?
> > 
> > /Jarkko
> 
> 
> Hi Jarko,
> 
> what output do you need exactly?

TPM gets added with tpm_add_hwrng() and the callback that is called by
hwrng subsystem is tpm_hwrng_read().

Obviously the former gets called (can be seen from the sysfs file). Just
wondering if it ever reaches tpm_hwrng_read().

/Jarkko