From: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterhuewe@gmx.de,
jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, tpmdd@selhorst.net,
jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com, patrickc@us.ibm.com,
Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] tpm: reduce polling time to usecs for even finer granularity
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:12:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180417131246.434-3-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180417131246.434-1-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
The TPM burstcount and status commands are supposed to return very
quickly [1][2]. This patch further reduces the TPM poll sleep time to usecs
in get_burstcount() and wait_for_tpm_stat() by calling usleep_range()
directly.
After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte burstcount for
1000 extends improved from ~10.7 sec to ~7 sec.
[1] From TCG Specification "TCG PC Client Specific TPM Interface
Specification (TIS), Family 1.2":
"NOTE : It takes roughly 330 ns per byte transfer on LPC. 256 bytes would
take 84 us, which is a long time to stall the CPU. Chipsets may not be
designed to post this much data to LPC; therefore, the CPU itself is
stalled for much of this time. Sending 1 kB would take 350 μs. Therefore,
even if the TPM_STS_x.burstCount field is a high value, software SHOULD
be interruptible during this period."
[2] From TCG Specification 2.0, "TCG PC Client Platform TPM Profile
(PTP) Specification":
"It takes roughly 330 ns per byte transfer on LPC. 256 bytes would take
84 us. Chipsets may not be designed to post this much data to LPC;
therefore, the CPU itself is stalled for much of this time. Sending 1 kB
would take 350 us. Therefore, even if the TPM_STS_x.burstCount field is a
high value, software should be interruptible during this period. For SPI,
assuming 20MHz clock and 64-byte transfers, it would take about 120 usec
to move 256B of data. Sending 1kB would take about 500 usec. If the
transactions are done using 4 bytes at a time, then it would take about
1 msec. to transfer 1kB of data."
Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h | 4 +++-
drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 5 +++--
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
index 7e797377e1eb..f0e4d290c347 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
@@ -54,7 +54,9 @@ enum tpm_timeout {
TPM_TIMEOUT = 5, /* msecs */
TPM_TIMEOUT_RETRY = 100, /* msecs */
TPM_TIMEOUT_RANGE_US = 300, /* usecs */
- TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL = 1 /* msecs */
+ TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL = 1, /* msecs */
+ TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MIN = 100, /* usecs */
+ TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MAX = 500 /* usecs */
};
/* TPM addresses */
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
index 021e6b68f2db..5bba5c662423 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
@@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ static int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
}
} else {
do {
- tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);
+ usleep_range(TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MIN,
+ TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MAX);
status = chip->ops->status(chip);
if ((status & mask) == mask)
return 0;
@@ -226,7 +227,7 @@ static int get_burstcount(struct tpm_chip *chip)
burstcnt = (value >> 8) & 0xFFFF;
if (burstcnt)
return burstcnt;
- tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);
+ usleep_range(TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MIN, TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MAX);
} while (time_before(jiffies, stop));
return -EBUSY;
}
--
2.13.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-17 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-17 13:12 [PATCH v2 0/2] tpm: improving granularity in poll sleep times Nayna Jain
2018-04-17 13:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit() Nayna Jain
2018-04-18 15:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-04-24 16:27 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2018-04-17 13:12 ` Nayna Jain [this message]
2018-04-18 15:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] tpm: reduce polling time to usecs for even finer granularity Mimi Zohar
2018-04-24 16:30 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180417131246.434-3-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patrickc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
--cc=tpmdd@selhorst.net \
--cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome