On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 05:52:56AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 05:34:38AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 08:38:25PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote: > > > On 6/24/20 8:00 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 08:06:35AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote: > > > > > From: Stefan Berger <stef...@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > > > > > Recent extensions of the TPM2 ACPI table added 3 more fields > > > > > including 12 bytes of start method specific parameters and Log Area > > > > > Minimum Length (u32) and Log Area Start Address (u64). So, we extend > > > > > the existing structure with these fields to allow non-UEFI systems > > > > > to access the TPM2's log. > > > > > > > > > > The specification that has the new fields is the following: > > > > > TCG ACPI Specification > > > > > Family "1.2" and "2.0" > > > > > Version 1.2, Revision 8 > > > > > > > > > > Adapt all existing table size calculations to use > > > > > offsetof(struct acpi_table_tpm2, start_method_specific) > > > > > [where start_method_specific is a newly added field] > > > > > rather than sizeof(struct acpi_table_tpm2) so that the addition > > > > > of the new fields does not affect current systems that may not > > > > > have them. > > > > > > > > > I found at least one regression from this patch. Please remove my > > > > reviewed-by comment form the next version. > > > > > > > > Should have: > > > > > > > > Link: > > > > https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-content/uploads/TCG_ACPIGeneralSpecification_v1.20_r8.pdf > > > > > > > > Please, add this. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stef...@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > Cc: linux-a...@vger.kernel.org > > > > > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c | 13 ++++++++++--- > > > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c | 4 +++- > > > > > include/acpi/actbl3.h | 5 +++-- > > > > > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c > > > > > index a9dcf31eadd2..0565aa5482f9 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c > > > > > @@ -669,7 +669,9 @@ static int crb_acpi_add(struct acpi_device > > > > > *device) > > > > > status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_TPM2, 1, > > > > > (struct acpi_table_header **) &buf); > > > > > - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || buf->header.length < sizeof(*buf)) { > > > > > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || buf->header.length < > > > > > + offsetof(struct acpi_table_tpm2, > > > > > + start_method_specific)) { > > > > > dev_err(dev, FW_BUG "failed to get TPM2 ACPI table\n"); > > > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > > } > > > > > @@ -684,14 +686,19 @@ static int crb_acpi_add(struct acpi_device > > > > > *device) > > > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > > if (sm == ACPI_TPM2_COMMAND_BUFFER_WITH_ARM_SMC) { > > > > > - if (buf->header.length < (sizeof(*buf) + > > > > > sizeof(*crb_smc))) { > > > > > + if (buf->header.length < > > > > > + (offsetof(struct acpi_table_tpm2, > > > > > + start_method_specific) + > > > > Should be > > > > > > > > offsetof(struct acpti_table_tpm2, log_area_minimum_length) > > > > > > > > > The old code had sizeof(*buf) with buf being 'struct acpi_table_tpm2' and > > > that was equivalent to offsetof(struct acpi_table_tpm2, > > > start_method_specific) since 'start_method_specific' is the first new > > > field > > > that we are adding right here. Also see 3rd paragraph in the patch > > > description. The replacement rule described there should apply to all > > > sizeof() calculations on 'struct acpi_table_tpm2.' > > > > Aren't you ignoring sizeof(*crb_smc) then? > > Duh, it's there I see. Sorry, my mistake. > > Please put the new fields in a separate struct: > > struct acpi_tpm2_phy { > u8 start_method_specific[12]; > u32 log_area_minimum_length; > u64 log_area_start_address; > }; > > This way we don't have to obfuscate all the calculations and zero out > the need for 1/2 in this patch set.
Also remark that, if you continue the current patch, that would need tested-by from ARM whereas a new struct does not because the ARM code is intact. /Jarkko
