[v6,1/7] tpm: dynamically allocate the allocated_banks array
diff mbox series

Message ID 20181204082138.24600-2-roberto.sassu@huawei.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • tpm: retrieve digest size of unknown algorithms from TPM
Related show

Commit Message

Roberto Sassu Dec. 4, 2018, 8:21 a.m. UTC
This patch renames active_banks (member of tpm_chip) to allocated_banks,
stores the number of allocated PCR banks in nr_allocated_banks (new member
of tpm_chip), and replaces the static array with a pointer to a dynamically
allocated array.

tpm2_get_pcr_allocation() determines if a PCR bank is allocated by checking
the mask in the TPML_PCR_SELECTION structure returned by the TPM for
TPM2_Get_Capability(). One PCR bank with algorithm set to SHA1 is always
allocated for TPM 1.x.

As a consequence of the introduction of nr_allocated_banks,
tpm_pcr_extend() does not check anymore if the algorithm stored in tpm_chip
is equal to zero.

Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Tested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c      |  1 +
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 18 +++++++++--------
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h           |  3 ++-
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c      | 10 ++++++++++
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c      | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 5 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

Comments

Jarkko Sakkinen Dec. 4, 2018, 11:18 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 09:21:32AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> tpm2_get_pcr_allocation() determines if a PCR bank is allocated by checking
> the mask in the TPML_PCR_SELECTION structure returned by the TPM for
> TPM2_Get_Capability(). One PCR bank with algorithm set to SHA1 is always
> allocated for TPM 1.x.

...

> +		for (j = 0; j < pcr_selection.size_of_select; j++)
> +			if (pcr_selection.pcr_select[j])
> +				break;
> +
> +		if (j < pcr_selection.size_of_select) {
> +			chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks] = hash_alg;
> +			nr_alloc_banks++;
> +		}
> +

Why was this needed? Can CAP_PCRS return completely unallocated banks?

Kind of out-of-context for the rest of the changes.

Should this be a bug fix of its own because it looks like as this is a
bug fix for existing code, and not a new feature? Just asking because
I don't yet fully understand this change.

Anyway, I believe that you can streamline this by:

/* Check that at least some of the PCRs have been allocated. This is
 * required because CAP_PCRS ...
 */
if (memchr_inv(pcr_selection.pcr_select, 0, pcr_selection.size_of_select))
	nr_allocated_banks++;

[yeah, comment would be awesome about CAP_PCRS. Did not finish up the
comment because I don't know the answer]

In addition, it would be consistent to call the local variable also
nr_allocated_banks (not nr_alloc_banks).

/Jarkko
Roberto Sassu Dec. 6, 2018, 5:56 p.m. UTC | #2
On 12/5/2018 12:18 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 09:21:32AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
>> tpm2_get_pcr_allocation() determines if a PCR bank is allocated by checking
>> the mask in the TPML_PCR_SELECTION structure returned by the TPM for
>> TPM2_Get_Capability(). One PCR bank with algorithm set to SHA1 is always
>> allocated for TPM 1.x.
> 
> ...
> 
>> +		for (j = 0; j < pcr_selection.size_of_select; j++)
>> +			if (pcr_selection.pcr_select[j])
>> +				break;
>> +
>> +		if (j < pcr_selection.size_of_select) {
>> +			chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks] = hash_alg;
>> +			nr_alloc_banks++;
>> +		}
>> +
> 
> Why was this needed? Can CAP_PCRS return completely unallocated banks?

This was discussed for patch v4 1/6:
---

Nayna wrote:

# /usr/local/bin/tssgetcapability -cap 5
2 PCR selections
     hash TPM_ALG_SHA1
     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
     ff ff ff
     hash TPM_ALG_SHA256
     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
     00 00 00

The pcr_select fields - "ff ff ff" and "00 00 00" - are bit masks for
the enabled PCRs. The SHA1 bank is enabled for all PCRs (0-23), while
the SHA256 bank is not enabled.
---

> Kind of out-of-context for the rest of the changes.
> 
> Should this be a bug fix of its own because it looks like as this is a
> bug fix for existing code, and not a new feature? Just asking because
> I don't yet fully understand this change.

If we store in tpm_chip the possible banks, IMA would calculate more
digests unnecessarily. But this problem does not happen without my patch
set, because tpm_pcr_extend() only accepts a SHA1 digest.


> Anyway, I believe that you can streamline this by:
> 
> /* Check that at least some of the PCRs have been allocated. This is
>   * required because CAP_PCRS ...
>   */
> if (memchr_inv(pcr_selection.pcr_select, 0, pcr_selection.size_of_select))
> 	nr_allocated_banks++;
> 
> [yeah, comment would be awesome about CAP_PCRS. Did not finish up the
> comment because I don't know the answer]
> 
> In addition, it would be consistent to call the local variable also
> nr_allocated_banks (not nr_alloc_banks).

Unfortunately, I exceed the limit of characters per line.

Roberto


> /Jarkko
>
Ken Goldman Dec. 11, 2018, 9:01 p.m. UTC | #3
On 12/4/2018 6:18 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> 
>> +		for (j = 0; j < pcr_selection.size_of_select; j++)
>> +			if (pcr_selection.pcr_select[j])
>> +				break;
>> +
>> +		if (j < pcr_selection.size_of_select) {
>> +			chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks] = hash_alg;
>> +			nr_alloc_banks++;
>> +		}
>> +
> 
> Why was this needed? Can CAP_PCRS return completely unallocated banks?
> 

Yes.  E.g., here's a TPM with 4 hash algorithms and two banks with 
allocated PCRs.

 > getcapability -cap 5
4 PCR selections
     hash TPM_ALG_SHA1
     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
     ff ff ff
     hash TPM_ALG_SHA256
     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
     ff ff ff
     hash TPM_ALG_SHA384
     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
     00 00 00
     hash TPM_ALG_SHA512
     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
     00 00 00
Jarkko Sakkinen Dec. 12, 2018, 6:32 p.m. UTC | #4
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 06:56:33PM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> 2 PCR selections
>     hash TPM_ALG_SHA1
>     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
>     ff ff ff
>     hash TPM_ALG_SHA256
>     TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
>     00 00 00
> 
> The pcr_select fields - "ff ff ff" and "00 00 00" - are bit masks for
> the enabled PCRs. The SHA1 bank is enabled for all PCRs (0-23), while
> the SHA256 bank is not enabled.

Uh, thanks. Can you add a note to the commit message?

 
> > 
> > /* Check that at least some of the PCRs have been allocated. This is
> >   * required because CAP_PCRS ...
> >   */
> > if (memchr_inv(pcr_selection.pcr_select, 0, pcr_selection.size_of_select))
> > 	nr_allocated_banks++;
> > 
> > [yeah, comment would be awesome about CAP_PCRS. Did not finish up the
> > comment because I don't know the answer]
> > 
> > In addition, it would be consistent to call the local variable also
> > nr_allocated_banks (not nr_alloc_banks).
> 
> Unfortunately, I exceed the limit of characters per line.

Not sure what you mean?

/Jarkko
Roberto Sassu Dec. 13, 2018, 8:14 a.m. UTC | #5
On 12/12/2018 7:32 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 06:56:33PM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
>> 2 PCR selections
>>      hash TPM_ALG_SHA1
>>      TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
>>      ff ff ff
>>      hash TPM_ALG_SHA256
>>      TPMS_PCR_SELECTION length 3
>>      00 00 00
>>
>> The pcr_select fields - "ff ff ff" and "00 00 00" - are bit masks for
>> the enabled PCRs. The SHA1 bank is enabled for all PCRs (0-23), while
>> the SHA256 bank is not enabled.
> 
> Uh, thanks. Can you add a note to the commit message?

Ok.


>>>
>>> /* Check that at least some of the PCRs have been allocated. This is
>>>    * required because CAP_PCRS ...
>>>    */
>>> if (memchr_inv(pcr_selection.pcr_select, 0, pcr_selection.size_of_select))
>>> 	nr_allocated_banks++;
>>>
>>> [yeah, comment would be awesome about CAP_PCRS. Did not finish up the
>>> comment because I don't know the answer]
>>>
>>> In addition, it would be consistent to call the local variable also
>>> nr_allocated_banks (not nr_alloc_banks).
>>
>> Unfortunately, I exceed the limit of characters per line.
> 
> Not sure what you mean?

---
-		chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks] = hash_alg;
+		chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks].alg_id = hash_alg;
---

If I use nr_allocated_banks, the line above (see patch 5/7) exceeds the
limit of 80 characters.

Roberto


> /Jarkko
>

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c
index 32db84683c40..ce851c62bb68 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c
@@ -160,6 +160,7 @@  static void tpm_dev_release(struct device *dev)
 	kfree(chip->log.bios_event_log);
 	kfree(chip->work_space.context_buf);
 	kfree(chip->work_space.session_buf);
+	kfree(chip->allocated_banks);
 	kfree(chip);
 }
 
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
index d9439f9abe78..7b80919228be 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
@@ -488,8 +488,7 @@  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tpm_pcr_read);
 int tpm_pcr_extend(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 pcr_idx, const u8 *hash)
 {
 	int rc;
-	struct tpm2_digest digest_list[ARRAY_SIZE(chip->active_banks)];
-	u32 count = 0;
+	struct tpm2_digest *digest_list;
 	int i;
 
 	chip = tpm_find_get_ops(chip);
@@ -497,16 +496,19 @@  int tpm_pcr_extend(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 pcr_idx, const u8 *hash)
 		return -ENODEV;
 
 	if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) {
-		memset(digest_list, 0, sizeof(digest_list));
+		digest_list = kcalloc(chip->nr_allocated_banks,
+				      sizeof(*digest_list), GFP_KERNEL);
+		if (!digest_list)
+			return -ENOMEM;
 
-		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(chip->active_banks) &&
-			    chip->active_banks[i] != TPM2_ALG_ERROR; i++) {
-			digest_list[i].alg_id = chip->active_banks[i];
+		for (i = 0; i < chip->nr_allocated_banks; i++) {
+			digest_list[i].alg_id = chip->allocated_banks[i];
 			memcpy(digest_list[i].digest, hash, TPM_DIGEST_SIZE);
-			count++;
 		}
 
-		rc = tpm2_pcr_extend(chip, pcr_idx, count, digest_list);
+		rc = tpm2_pcr_extend(chip, pcr_idx, chip->nr_allocated_banks,
+				     digest_list);
+		kfree(digest_list);
 		tpm_put_ops(chip);
 		return rc;
 	}
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
index f27d1f38a93d..6b94306ab7c5 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
@@ -257,7 +257,8 @@  struct tpm_chip {
 	const struct attribute_group *groups[3];
 	unsigned int groups_cnt;
 
-	u16 active_banks[7];
+	u32 nr_allocated_banks;
+	u16 *allocated_banks;
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
 	acpi_handle acpi_dev_handle;
 	char ppi_version[TPM_PPI_VERSION_LEN + 1];
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
index 6f306338953b..0874743ca96d 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
@@ -709,6 +709,16 @@  int tpm1_auto_startup(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 		goto out;
 	}
 
+	chip->allocated_banks = kcalloc(1, sizeof(*chip->allocated_banks),
+					GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!chip->allocated_banks) {
+		rc = -ENOMEM;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	chip->allocated_banks[0] = TPM2_ALG_SHA1;
+	chip->nr_allocated_banks = 1;
+
 	return rc;
 out:
 	if (rc > 0)
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c
index a6bec13afa69..245669a7aba5 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@  int tpm2_pcr_extend(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 pcr_idx, u32 count,
 	int i;
 	int j;
 
-	if (count > ARRAY_SIZE(chip->active_banks))
+	if (count > chip->nr_allocated_banks)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	rc = tpm_buf_init(&buf, TPM2_ST_SESSIONS, TPM2_CC_PCR_EXTEND);
@@ -825,11 +825,14 @@  static ssize_t tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 	void *marker;
 	void *end;
 	void *pcr_select_offset;
-	unsigned int count;
 	u32 sizeof_pcr_selection;
+	u32 nr_possible_banks;
+	u32 nr_alloc_banks = 0;
+	u16 hash_alg;
 	u32 rsp_len;
 	int rc;
 	int i = 0;
+	int j;
 
 	rc = tpm_buf_init(&buf, TPM2_ST_NO_SESSIONS, TPM2_CC_GET_CAPABILITY);
 	if (rc)
@@ -844,11 +847,14 @@  static ssize_t tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 	if (rc)
 		goto out;
 
-	count = be32_to_cpup(
+	nr_possible_banks = be32_to_cpup(
 		(__be32 *)&buf.data[TPM_HEADER_SIZE + 5]);
 
-	if (count > ARRAY_SIZE(chip->active_banks)) {
-		rc = -ENODEV;
+	chip->allocated_banks = kcalloc(nr_possible_banks,
+					sizeof(*chip->allocated_banks),
+					GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!chip->allocated_banks) {
+		rc = -ENOMEM;
 		goto out;
 	}
 
@@ -857,7 +863,7 @@  static ssize_t tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 	rsp_len = be32_to_cpup((__be32 *)&buf.data[2]);
 	end = &buf.data[rsp_len];
 
-	for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < nr_possible_banks; i++) {
 		pcr_select_offset = marker +
 			offsetof(struct tpm2_pcr_selection, size_of_select);
 		if (pcr_select_offset >= end) {
@@ -866,17 +872,25 @@  static ssize_t tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 		}
 
 		memcpy(&pcr_selection, marker, sizeof(pcr_selection));
-		chip->active_banks[i] = be16_to_cpu(pcr_selection.hash_alg);
+		hash_alg = be16_to_cpu(pcr_selection.hash_alg);
+
+		for (j = 0; j < pcr_selection.size_of_select; j++)
+			if (pcr_selection.pcr_select[j])
+				break;
+
+		if (j < pcr_selection.size_of_select) {
+			chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks] = hash_alg;
+			nr_alloc_banks++;
+		}
+
 		sizeof_pcr_selection = sizeof(pcr_selection.hash_alg) +
 			sizeof(pcr_selection.size_of_select) +
 			pcr_selection.size_of_select;
 		marker = marker + sizeof_pcr_selection;
 	}
 
+	chip->nr_allocated_banks = nr_alloc_banks;
 out:
-	if (i < ARRAY_SIZE(chip->active_banks))
-		chip->active_banks[i] = TPM2_ALG_ERROR;
-
 	tpm_buf_destroy(&buf);
 
 	return rc;