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;
From:   "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
CC:     "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        "stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] tpm/tpm_crb: Avoid unaligned reads in crb_recv()
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v3] tpm/tpm_crb: Avoid unaligned reads in crb_recv()
Thread-Index: AQHUvUDUPtSrjGtlHk6wCuMRxetyu6XRCy8AgAAY64CAACU3gIAARWmAgAEIZgCAACTckA==
Date:   Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:55:55 +0000
Message-ID: <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9DA91AEE@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20190205105136.3086-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9DA90A8B@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20190205143541.GA18330@linux.intel.com>
 <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9DA90C75@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20190205205719.GA13023@linux.intel.com>
 <20190206124324.GA8126@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190206124324.GA8126@linux.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.0.400.15
dlp-reaction: no-action
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


 ()
> 
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 10:57:19PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 02:56:02PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Jarkko Sakkinen [mailto:jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 16:36
> > > > To: Winkler, Tomas <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
> > > > Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> > > > linux- security-module@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org;
> > > > James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>; Jerry Snitselaar
> > > > <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tpm/tpm_crb: Avoid unaligned reads in
> > > > crb_recv()
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 11:07:16AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > > > > > The current approach to read first 6 bytes from the response
> > > > > > and then tail of the response, can cause the 2nd
> > > > > > memcpy_fromio() to do an unaligned read (e.g. read 32-bit word
> > > > > > from address aligned to a 16-bits), depending on how
> > > > > > memcpy_fromio() is implemented. If this happens, the read will
> > > > > > fail and the memory controller will fill the read with 1's.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This was triggered by 170d13ca3a2f, which should be probably
> > > > > > refined to check and react to the address alignment. Before
> > > > > > that commit, on
> > > > > > x86
> > > > > > memcpy_fromio() turned out to be memcpy(). By a luck GCC has
> > > > > > done the right thing (from tpm_crb's perspective) for us so
> > > > > > far, but we should not
> > > > rely on that.
> > > > > > Thus, it makes sense to fix this also in tpm_crb, not least
> > > > > > because the fix can be then backported to stable kernels and
> > > > > > make them more robust when compiled in differing environments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > > > > > Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
> > > > > > Cc: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
> > > > > > Cc: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> > > > > > Fixes: 30fc8d138e91 ("tpm: TPM 2.0 CRB Interface")
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen
> > > > > > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > v3:
> > > > > > * Fix typo i.e. %s/reminding/remaining/g
> > > > >
> > > > > Why you haven't fixed all the typos I've pointed out? I think you missed
> that.
> > > >
> > > > I saw only comment about remaining. Was there something else? Can fix.
> > >
> > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg283648.html
> > >
> > > 1. unrecovable -> unrecoverable
> > > 2. /* Read 8 bytes (not just 6 bytes, which would cover the tag and
> > > the response  length
> > > > +	 * fields) in order to make sure that the remaining memory
> > > > +accesses */
> >
> > Thanks and apologies for missing these.
> 
> Fixed comments and applied the patch, thank you. Do I amend your acked-by?

Please, do.
Thanks
Tomas