Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1571295
| From | Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log |
| Date | 2017-02-01 08:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t5XGi-2WB-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <t5gL0-2ll-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t5gL0-2ll-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <t5KJ4-3yR-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <t5NGW-5im-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <t5NGW-5im-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 02/01/2017 02:20 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 12:14:12AM +0530, Nayna wrote:
>>> I already sent my pull request to 4.11 and even today I found something
>>> fishy. You declared a function local array by using a variable in "tpm:
>>> enhance TPM 2.0 PCR extend to support multiple banks" (max_active_banks
>>> or something). And the event log patches have just passed the review.
>>
>> Yes. I have checked using clang and it has passed the clang.. and I also
>> verified there were no complains during build.
>
> What we can deduce from that is that they didn't expose the issue in
> question.
>
> I found this by running sparse with make C=2 M=drives/char/tpm
>
>> What type of problem do you see ?
>
> It is disallowed to do stack allocation in the kernel code even if C
> standard would allow it. Stack is scarce resource so you need to know
> its usage at compile time.
>
> In this case you actually know the allocation because the value is not
> changed during the course of the function but it is still bad. Probably
> compiler will optimize it out. Still it is not a good practice.
Thanks Jarkko for explaining it.
Hmm, do you want me to send a patch for this ?
I think what we want is actually define it just array of size as 7.
>
>> Also, to understand, this is related to multi-bank patchset. I mean how does
>> it affect for event log patchset ?
>
> Well in both cases these have landed fairly late but I asked from James
> whether I'll have to postpone these to 4.12.
>
> Usually when I've sent my release pull request I do not want to make any
> radical changes to the codebase because they always require extra QA and
> thus take extra time.
Thanks again for explaining details.
Thanks & Regards,
- Nayna
>
> /Jarkko
>
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-31 18:50 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-31 21:40 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> - 2017-01-31 22:50 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-31 23:40 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-01 04:50 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-02-01 11:40 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-01 14:50 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-02-01 19:30 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-31 22:00 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-01 08:40 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-02-01 19:30 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-02-01 15:50 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-02-01 16:00 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-01 20:30 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-02-01 21:00 +0100
Re: Fwd: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support,for TPM 2.0 firmware event log Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-01-31 22:00 +0100
csiph-web