Received: by 2002:ac0:8c9a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id r26csp3569682ima; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 01:15:25 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbnFQuAx46yret5XwhZMmTc1K3Vqb4xY8L2L5UwBAxMo3pEtfL6W3FOcE9f91jWPH4uO3BJ X-Received: by 2002:a62:e012:: with SMTP id f18mr17488390pfh.119.1549271725473; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 01:15:25 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549271725; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QeLahAuA7S1qg2OdGEPXjyaAsQ7Lta6343dJT0/f5Kz43L/02zuVHT96qomvHypP2Y HRny0hmsUwhLsGspGmZY18foEQDGM2GSO8ARObwb3xFlPhTPE4hPHodeE4F2tRHd0XVT nQ0uByyzUOr6s02QkwER/a9Ccn4QIHN2NbFf3D86inX963MkJnlXV6N40KdMnLblk7aL tIDxYaOSkhrnnR1wJqKrcltqpxQdNu8w9C3tZBfQRtjrPx8PES8mYEi0LdyWvYCn2PmI 4g3A0dICaGhkvaCluBCdoGJUxxPd4u3jjaaWOio5kABtBtcRWZptuzIhNWs1WrOEuZ2m giqg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=Zbhet44RZNTPJVmqmaj16fpONVofG4UJi3o5gU8kiXM=; b=GE/V0u4qzBpQs5nKpSValk/IzNvgBnrWGA6mFjH1K6MqMcyMpNjY8o93HLkVxpcDqY eT2LqBFYjG8V8V4gqdeqk0IWDmdQrNGm8YGqQ2MmX3WNLukL+PjHfX7hI4mwMwi17h40 8tybpOd36H7iltfclKMAoFfffeBqmOrjnKl1zh5FclipurdwTi7UzSpwzW++XcAUxjuI iEOPKdn3GaNUyHfsLhHPUfDtiTyMKCQ6bFOLQ2P8Ifv60graIcu5H5Mwd5nEmASVe0O2 m7oH0tHxjRrZvf5bvc0VSGpaMivOCWIYjUD7v+ApWN5WVY+4JiV6HINxOOEDusMiOEsM JKfQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a19si14816500pgj.429.2019.02.04.01.15.09; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 01:15:25 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728963AbfBDJOv (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:14:51 -0500 Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([185.176.76.210]:32861 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726987AbfBDJOv (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:14:51 -0500 Received: from LHREML714-CAH.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 53BCC73C55901C077B4B; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:14:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.204.65.155] (10.204.65.155) by smtpsuk.huawei.com (10.201.108.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:14:43 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 6/6] tpm: pass an array of tpm_extend_digest structures to tpm_pcr_extend() To: Mimi Zohar , , , , CC: , , , , References: <20190201100641.26936-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <20190201100641.26936-7-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <1549048506.6993.73.camel@linux.ibm.com> From: Roberto Sassu Message-ID: <9f8a64d6-d566-1497-1d2b-465440cdfa80@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:14:38 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1549048506.6993.73.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.204.65.155] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2/1/2019 8:15 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > Hi Roberto, > > Sorry for the delayed review.  A few comments inline below, minor > suggestions. > >> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h >> index cc12f3449a72..e6b2dcb0846a 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h >> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h >> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ extern int ima_policy_flag; >> extern int ima_hash_algo; >> extern int ima_appraise; >> extern struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip; >> +extern struct tpm_digest *digests; >> >> /* IMA event related data */ >> struct ima_event_data { >> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c >> index 6bb42a9c5e47..296a965b11ef 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c >> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c >> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ >> /* name for boot aggregate entry */ >> static const char boot_aggregate_name[] = "boot_aggregate"; >> struct tpm_chip *ima_tpm_chip; >> +struct tpm_digest *digests; > > "digests" is used in the new ima_init_digests() and in > ima_pcr_extend().  It's nice that the initialization routines are > grouped together here in ima_init.c, but wouldn't it better to define > "digests" in ima_queued.c, where it is currently being used? >  "digests" could then be defined as static. 'digests' and ima_init_digests() can be moved to ima_queue.c, but I have to add the definition of ima_init_digests() to ima.h. Should I do it? >> /* Add the boot aggregate to the IMA measurement list and extend >> * the PCR register. >> @@ -104,6 +105,24 @@ void __init ima_load_x509(void) >> } >> #endif >> >> +int __init ima_init_digests(void) >> +{ >> + int i; >> + >> + if (!ima_tpm_chip) >> + return 0; >> + >> + digests = kcalloc(ima_tpm_chip->nr_allocated_banks, sizeof(*digests), >> + GFP_NOFS); >> + if (!digests) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < ima_tpm_chip->nr_allocated_banks; i++) >> + digests[i].alg_id = ima_tpm_chip->allocated_banks[i].alg_id; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> int __init ima_init(void) >> { >> int rc; >> @@ -125,6 +144,9 @@ int __init ima_init(void) >> >> ima_load_kexec_buffer(); >> >> + rc = ima_init_digests(); > > Ok. Getting the tpm chip is at the beginning of this function. >  Deferring allocating "digests" to here, avoids having to free memory > on failure. > > ima_load_kexec_buffer() restores prior measurements, but doesn't > extend the TPM.  For anyone reading the code, a short comment above > ima_load_kexec_buffer() would make sense. Ok. Should I resend the last patch again with the fixes you suggested? Thanks Roberto > Mimi > >> + if (rc != 0) >> + return rc; >> rc = ima_add_boot_aggregate(); /* boot aggregate must be first entry */ >> if (rc != 0) >> return rc; >> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c >> index 0e41dc1df1d4..719e88ca58f6 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c >> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_queue.c >> @@ -140,11 +140,15 @@ unsigned long ima_get_binary_runtime_size(void) >> static int ima_pcr_extend(const u8 *hash, int pcr) >> { >> int result = 0; >> + int i; >> >> if (!ima_tpm_chip) >> return result; >> >> - result = tpm_pcr_extend(ima_tpm_chip, pcr, hash); >> + for (i = 0; i < ima_tpm_chip->nr_allocated_banks; i++) >> + memcpy(digests[i].digest, hash, TPM_DIGEST_SIZE); >> + >> + result = tpm_pcr_extend(ima_tpm_chip, pcr, digests); >> if (result != 0) >> pr_err("Error Communicating to TPM chip, result: %d\n", result); >> return result; >> > -- HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063 Managing Director: Bo PENG, Jian LI, Yanli SHI