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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Fixes for TPM interrupt handling
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_Niew=c3=b6hner?= <linux@mniewoehner.de>
Cc:     peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        stefanb@linux.ibm.com, James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com,
        keescook@chromium.org, jsnitsel@redhat.com, ml.linux@elloe.vision,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        twawrzynczak@chromium.org, Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
        Philipp Rosenberger <p.rosenberger@kunbus.com>
References: <20210501135727.17747-1-LinoSanfilippo@gmx.de>
 <20210501135727.17747-3-LinoSanfilippo@gmx.de> <YJAby8mmiJ74qWAh@kernel.org>
 <6722bf6f-1a3f-ee9c-55e2-cf63c64266a9@gmx.de> <YJNKs8bUMGOzFre+@kernel.org>
 <2a1a1cf61732eff1608aeae74054a0c135c1671f.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <Yj0lhqTP1RoedxSc@iki.fi>
 <0d6c22b40a2f17d4b260f287d4c479a96a88b0b1.camel@mniewoehner.de>
 <efdb99b3-6d33-38b1-64a0-671821101631@gmx.de>
 <c8c0c5fb614d8b2de2a5faee2ef5ff3214281064.camel@kernel.org>
From:   Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <77374443-dc9b-5d1d-c652-0d093b6029f4@gmx.de>
Date:   Sun, 24 Apr 2022 04:22:11 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c8c0c5fb614d8b2de2a5faee2ef5ff3214281064.camel@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk


Hi,

On 20.04.22 at 07:30, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> n Sat, 2022-03-26 at 04:24 +0100, Lino Sanfilippo wrote:
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> On 25.03.22 at 13:32, Michael Niew=C3=B6hner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Lino, I'd be happy to test the patches, when you have time and inter=
est to
>>>>> work
>>>>> on this again!
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Michael
>>>>
>>>> It's quite easy to test them out. Both fixes are in the mainline GIT =
tree.
>>>> E.g. give a shot rc1, and please report if any issues persists to:
>>>>
>>>> =C2=A0 linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org=C2=A0
>>>>
>>>> BR, Jarkko
>>>
>>> I don't see Linos patches on mainline. Also, the series included four =
patches:
>>> [PATCH v3 0/4] Fixes for TPM interrupt handling
>>> [PATCH v3 1/4] tpm: Use a threaded interrupt handler
>>> [PATCH v3 2/4] tpm: Simplify locality handling
>>> [PATCH v3 3/4] tpm: Fix test for interrupts
>>> [PATCH v3 4/4] tpm: Only enable supported irqs
>>>
>>> Three of them are relevant for the interrupt problem, which is still p=
resent in
>>> mainline, as these patches were refused:
>>> [PATCH v3 1/4] tpm: Use a threaded interrupt handler
>>> [PATCH v3 2/4] tpm: Simplify locality handling
>>> [PATCH v3 3/4] tpm: Fix test for interrupts
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>
>> You are right, the interrupts are still not working in the mainline ker=
nel.
>> I would gladly make another attempt to fix this but rather step by step
>> than in a series that tries to fix (different) things at once.
>>
>> A first step could be to have a sleepable context for the interrupt han=
dling,
>> since in case of SPI the accesses to the irq status register may sleep.
>>
>> I sent a patch for this purpose once, but it seems to have gone lost:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210620023444.14684-1-LinoSanfilippo@gmx.d=
e/
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Lino
>
> I went these through one by one>
> # Above linked patch
>
> Boolean parameters are considered bad. I.e. use named flags
> instead. This is for above linked patch.

Ok, we could extend tpm_tis_flags by a flag "TPM_TIS_USE_THREADED_IRQ"
for this.

>
> # [PATCH v3 3/4] tpm: Fix test for interrupts
>
> 1. Please remove "unnecessarily complicated" sentence because
>    it cannot be evaluated. It's your opinion, which might perhaps
>    be correct, but it is irrelevant for any possible patch
>    description.
> 2. There's no such thing as "fix by re-implementation". Please
>    explain instead code change is relevant for the bug fix.
> 3. If set_bit() et al necessarily to fix a possible race condition
>    you need to have a separate patch for that.
>
> To move forward, start with a better summary such as
>
> "tpm: move interrupt test to tpm_tis_probe_irq_single()"
>
> I'd also either revert the change for flags, or alternatively
> move it to separate patch explaining race condition. Otherwise,
> there's no argument of saying that using set_bit() is more
> proper. This will make the change more localized.
>

Ok, I will split the fix for the irq test into two patches then.

>
> # [PATCH v3 2/4] tpm: Simplify locality handling
>
> "As a side-effect these modifications fix a bug which results in the
> following warning when using TPM 2:"
>
> Generally speaking, the simplifications should be done on top of code
> that does not have known bugs, even if the simplification renders out
> the bug. This is because then we have code that have potentially unknown
> unknown bugs.
>
> I hope you see my point. The problem with these patches were then
> and is still that they intermix bug fixes and other modifications and
> thus cannot be taken in.
>

Yes, I can see that point.

> BR, Jarkko
>

Thanks a lot for the review. I will prepare new patches with the suggested
changes.

Best regards,
Lino