Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <1597595769.8344.7.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] docs: update trusted-encrypted.rst
From:   James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>
Reply-To: jejb@linux.ibm.com
To:     Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>, Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>,
        keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Sun, 16 Aug 2020 09:36:09 -0700
In-Reply-To: <cf667ea0-dab7-a242-886c-938582c62ff6@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20200815075143.47082-1-colyli@suse.de>
         <cf667ea0-dab7-a242-886c-938582c62ff6@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 2020-08-16 at 12:06 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
[...]
> A note in this file states this:
> 
> Note: When using a TPM 2.0 with a persistent key with handle
> 0x81000001, append 'keyhandle=0x81000001' to statements between
> quotes, such as "new 32 keyhandle=0x81000001".
> 
> Now if someone was (still) interested in TPM 1.2 then the below
> changes you are proposing wouldn't work for them. Maybe you should
> adapt the  note to state that these keyhandle=... should be removed
> for the TPM 1.2 case.

Actually, I also have a plan to match what userspace does and simply
assume a keyhandle of 40000001 (generate an EC Storage Primary Key on
the fly) if it's not specified, which will make the TPM1.2 and 2.0
versions of this the same.  Unfortunately the necessary precursor
patches are taking an age to get upstream.

James