Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:7420:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id hk32csp3582074pxb; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 01:00:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxpWxqT83N4Q0ocnuK4cWNYDyuyHm60OxwNIfI7tRFkXB1Sh+LB1OqC7lKYm6+dltxJO0Va X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3bc7:b0:6cc:493e:31e4 with SMTP id v7-20020a1709063bc700b006cc493e31e4mr14778543ejf.549.1645434003188; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 01:00:03 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1645434003; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=r75Y/ib+ND9oUlbpeHaXELuac9JSGmgTArRdoU5VUcS5GSGXLz0Cp1ifqnnm0gNdqH 9UfR7RvwMJK8EJg0g/8UvATNy6Jtc+TI5oTuZrXtJnfA9DbDuswzn3jDoNu+2REPiU2V OIAIrqExLZVIAv6ZgHnP2djmuEskGl4ox2nDmzOT1CaojmZ+j1Y/JgBcEyOnmAlNDL4T gUZn4R/POUr5BvGg6eQhT6kgXye1HLC4ND0F6AGA6VI1+lWgoCn+5fOpt94rxQ0ir4Sj cUlW5VDNvit+UC8QgkLJsPUJfZ0KRRSqbnQ9OwA9Na42fsZq2CmGTBmbE+n+iSqicePV HJDQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=NpdSUnXRxesydUm5tlJieP7H4jQ6D10X8JQc10SzdfA=; b=fbE1+TRPnfW4DAdXkAqc5v9fxdxJwgpRq7QGxeV7DBy2BqJbJQdtwMe9VEXgsbPCCM 7eEGWMHQcaY6XCTTZeMmkdXgVosnM3dipE6WIUOrpAfNey1JXEaMSAgUC8ewmxOW2YtS Zy8SEFfXq1YB7fRvnH+R9uXePX7Q5NjIAFnxH+Rv8rz5gv1ua336J3bclfGIXUlypewh 9Kq9AW5Q5FCrXPHnP39JQ52P5E2hoD1hKxgMwYBrExYDHnIM/DJ4LHHOVMzgVT4W+rm9 sAPLdl6OPzGgKRxUnsMvbMW1jQ8HO3op7MP8Bfvp9QnlMAYyBvwm0qXGBH6xXAgfhi5C Cilg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=MWm739kB; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id hs3si9927958ejc.45.2022.02.21.00.59.35; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 01:00:03 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=MWm739kB; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245197AbiBTW51 (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 20 Feb 2022 17:57:27 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:53900 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231292AbiBTW50 (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Feb 2022 17:57:26 -0500 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CD2E3CA51; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 14:57:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F036060FA9; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 22:57:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 93164C340EC; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 22:57:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1645397823; bh=j+DoopoQDSYhruoe5UkdGXLSKDJJhsexG0oI9rn2I+c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MWm739kBOsr4KUdUF3/Ot2fcmIJ7JzfQlVbJq5YpNhZt0OWmUuG82VrBu0PxHHfU7 9FSLGvv7R74lgmpaRoeNt2qsHIfIhScHn4sRIShE7VdM7RErhuHK7bXYHTY55pvtF9 speLumPdMbb1tmXtozo/bjU0oo+PLDdup4IaJTNFHVAYP3Z5myeHaueLQjzZXvwxTN eq60KOVLpXCnENLRRLPpn4UFbcUhtj7RADE76OF/+U3/0hPu61S6NduEpB9sgC84w4 ji4ifCiXSKu+Vp64eWmMVLn+VmgZmOCjR/B8RmWYJGo9U0Um/QNlbVxzBO7OGacXXa YAMHNbIXUBCnA== Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 23:57:41 +0100 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Mimi Zohar Cc: Paul Menzel , Dmitry Kasatkin , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Petr Vorel Subject: Re: init_ima() adds 8 % to boot time Message-ID: References: <32f90c33-eeb9-64a0-b2e2-9258ba2e1820@molgen.mpg.de> <7d84425f36e3b04ab1adabed23f98b478b53b770.camel@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <7d84425f36e3b04ab1adabed23f98b478b53b770.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:19:37AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote: > [Cc'ing Jarkko, Petr Vorel] > > Hi Paul, > > On Sat, 2022-02-19 at 10:44 +0100, Paul Menzel wrote: > > Dear Linux folks, > > > > > > Debian builds its Linux kernel image with `CONFIG_IMA=y` since version > > 5.13.9 [1]. Unfortunately, on the Dell Latitude E7250 `init_ima` takes > > around 33 ms, adding 8 % to the boot time up to loading the initrd. > > > > [ 0.000000] Linux version 5.17.0-rc4-amd64 > > (debian-kernel@lists.debian.org) (gcc-11 (Debian 11.2.0-16) 11.2.0, GNU > > ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.38) #1 SMP PREEMPT Debian 5.17~rc4-1~exp1 > > (2022-02-18) > > […] > > [ 0.238520] calling init_tis+0x0/0xde @ 1 > > [ 0.254749] tpm_tis 00:08: 1.2 TPM (device-id 0x3205, rev-id 80) > > [ 0.285665] initcall init_tis+0x0/0xde returned 0 after 46038 usecs > > […] > > [ 0.301327] calling init_ima+0x0/0xb5 @ 1 > > [ 0.301332] ima: Allocated hash algorithm: sha256 > > [ 0.335502] ima: No architecture policies found > > [ 0.335520] initcall init_ima+0x0/0xb5 returned 0 after 33389 usecs > > […] > > [ 0.447312] Run /init as init process > > > > Tracing `init_ima` with a depth of 5 shows > > `ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm()` takes 24 ms, and > > `ima_add_template_entry()` takes 10 ms. > > > > 1.282630 | 1) swapper-1 | | > > ima_add_boot_aggregate() { > > 1.282631 | 1) swapper-1 | | > > ima_calc_boot_agg:0regate() { > > 1.282631 | 1) swapper-1 | 0.153 us | > > ima_alloc_tfm(); > > 1.282631 | 1) swapper-1 | * 24404.59 us | > > ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(); > > 1.307037 | 1) swapper-1 | 0.482 us | > > ima_free_tfm.part.0(); > > 1.307038 | 1) swapper-1 | * 24407.06 us | } /* > > ima_calc_boot_aggregate */ > > 1.307038 | 1) swapper-1 | | > > ima_alloc_init_template() { > > 1.307038 | 1) swapper-1 | 0.173 us | > > ima_template_desc_current(); > > 1.307039 | 1) swapper-1 | 0.836 us | > > __kmalloc(); > > 1.307040 | 1) swapper-1 | 0.580 us | > > __kmalloc(); > > 1.307041 | 1) swapper-1 | 1.555 us | > > ima_eventdigest_ng_init(); > > 1.307043 | 1) swapper-1 | 1.275 us | > > ima_eventname_ng_init(); > > 1.307044 | 1) swapper-1 | 0.256 us | > > ima_eventsig_init(); > > 1.307045 | 1) swapper-1 | 6.618 us | } /* > > ima_alloc_init_template */ > > 1.307045 | 1) swapper-1 | | > > ima_store_template() { > > 1.307045 | 1) swapper-1 | 5.049 us | > > ima_calc_field_array_hash(); > > 1.307051 | 1) swapper-1 | # 9316.953 us | > > ima_add_template_entry(); > > 1.316369 | 1) swapper-1 | # 9323.728 us | } /* > > ima_store_template */ > > 1.316369 | 1) swapper-1 | * 33738.54 us | } /* > > ima_add_boot_aggregate */ > > > > Tracing `ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm()` (attached) shows that the first > > `tpm1_pcr_read()` takes 16 ms in `tpm_transmit()`. Is communicating with > > the TPM supposed to be that slow? > > > > In the last years, Linux decreased it’s boot time a lot, so do you see a > > way to move things out of the hot path and get `init_ima` well below 10 > > ms? (As systems get faster and faster, having systems with standard > > distributions to be up below two seconds after pressing the power button > > should be a reasonable goal (500 ms firmware (like coreboot) + 500 ms > > Linux kernel + 1 s user space). > > > > > > [1]: > > https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/commit/6e679322d7d98d30b4a8a3d1b659c899a6e9d4df > > Thank you including the initial and other TPM delays. The main reason > for the "boot_aggregate" is to tie the pre-OS measurements to the post > OS measurement list. Without the TPM based 'boot_aggregate', any IMA > measurement list could be used to verify a TPM quote. The > 'boot_aggregate' is calculated, originally, based on PCRs 0 - 7 and > more recently may include PCRs 8 & 9 as well. The 'boot_aggregate' is > the first record in the IMA measurement list and the first record after > a soft reboot (kexec). It is the one and only IMA measurement record > not dependent on policy. > > There are TPM 1.2 & 2.0 standards' requirements, but there are also > buggy TPMs which don't adhere to them to such an extent that IMA goes > into 'TPM-bypass' mode. Perhaps for those not interested in extending > the concepts of trusted boot to the running OS, defining a new boot > command line option to force IMA into this 'TPM-bypass' mode would be > an acceptable alternative to the delay. The IMA measurement list would > still include a 'boot_aggregate' record, but one containing 0's. I support the opt-in boot option. If the full hardware specifications are known for a device, you might want to use this. /Jarkko