| Message ID | 153486701644.13066.13372706238885253812.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [01/23] TPM: Add new TPMs to the tail of the list to prevent inadvertent change of dev | expand |
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 04:56:56PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Add newly registered TPMs to the tail of the list, not the beginning, so that > things that are specifying TPM_ANY_NUM don't find that the device they're > using has inadvertently changed. Adding a second device would break IMA, for > instance. > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> > Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> > cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > --- We really should apply this patch... Jason
Use "tpm" instead of "TPM" in the short summary. On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 04:56:56PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Add newly registered TPMs to the tail of the list, not the beginning, so that > things that are specifying TPM_ANY_NUM don't find that the device they're > using has inadvertently changed. Adding a second device would break IMA, for > instance. > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> > Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> > cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Usually I add Cc-tag before signed-off-by's (and have the first c in upper case). Peter's singed-off-by should be accompanied with a co-developed-by tag if he has participated to the development of this commit. As far as I see signed-off-by without co-developed-by makes sense in two occasions: * You own the subsystem tree i.e. you have to sign the changes that you include part of your pull request. * You are the initial authoer of the change. > --- > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c > index 6af17002a115..cfb9089887bd 100644 > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c > @@ -1122,7 +1122,7 @@ struct tpm_chip *tpm_register_hardware(struct device *dev, > > /* Make chip available */ > spin_lock(&driver_lock); > - list_add_rcu(&chip->list, &tpm_chip_list); I would add here a comment just as a remainder. > + list_add_tail_rcu(&chip->list, &tpm_chip_list); > spin_unlock(&driver_lock); > > return chip; /Jarkko
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 12:30:04PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 04:56:56PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > Add newly registered TPMs to the tail of the list, not the beginning, so that > > things that are specifying TPM_ANY_NUM don't find that the device they're > > using has inadvertently changed. Adding a second device would break IMA, for > > instance. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> > > cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > --- > > We really should apply this patch... > > Jason This is the first time I remember seeing it. /Jarkko
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 09:24:34AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 12:30:04PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 04:56:56PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > > Add newly registered TPMs to the tail of the list, not the beginning, so that > > > things that are specifying TPM_ANY_NUM don't find that the device they're > > > using has inadvertently changed. Adding a second device would break IMA, for > > > instance. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> > > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> > > > cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > --- > > > > We really should apply this patch... > > > > Jason > > This is the first time I remember seeing it. At least in the sense that I should review it. /Jarkkko
On Fri, 2018-08-24 at 09:25 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 09:24:34AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 12:30:04PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 04:56:56PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > > > Add newly registered TPMs to the tail of the list, not the beginning, so that > > > > things that are specifying TPM_ANY_NUM don't find that the device they're > > > > using has inadvertently changed. Adding a second device would break IMA, for > > > > instance. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> > > > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> > > > > cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > --- > > > > > > We really should apply this patch... > > > > > > Jason > > > > This is the first time I remember seeing it. > > At least in the sense that I should review it. I remember this patch, because it affected IMA. It has already been upstreamed as 398a1e71dc82. Mimi
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c index 6af17002a115..cfb9089887bd 100644 --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c @@ -1122,7 +1122,7 @@ struct tpm_chip *tpm_register_hardware(struct device *dev, /* Make chip available */ spin_lock(&driver_lock); - list_add_rcu(&chip->list, &tpm_chip_list); + list_add_tail_rcu(&chip->list, &tpm_chip_list); spin_unlock(&driver_lock); return chip;