From: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.ibm.com>,
zohar@linux.ibm.com, dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com,
jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com,
zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com, zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: optimize ima_pcr_extend function by asynchronous
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:53:06 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7335613b-0a18-1c28-9b65-687d0b44d01f@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0fdd1c13-51c6-e65c-1ca5-38621fa21f53@linux.ibm.com>
On 2020/4/15 2:07, Ken Goldman wrote:
> I wonder if there's a different issue? I just ran selftest with
> fullTest = yes in two different TPM vendors.
>
> One took 230 msec, the other 320 msec.
>
> I've never seen anything near 10 seconds.
>
> Note that this is worse than the worst case because it's forcing a full
> retest. The TPM typically starts its self test immediately at power up
> and could be complete by the time the OS starts to boot.
>
> When I run selftest with fullTest = no, I get 30 msec, probably
> because it's not doing anything.
>
> On 4/14/2020 7:50 AM, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>> Because ima_pcr_extend() to operate the TPM chip, this process is
>> very time-consuming, for IMA, this is a blocking action, especially
>> when the TPM is in self test state, this process will block for up
>> to ten seconds.
>
Ten seconds is an extreme scenario, and I haven't seen this worst case,
but the TPM driver will fail to return in this scenario.
Thanks and best,
Tianjia
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-15 2:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-14 11:50 Tianjia Zhang
2020-04-14 16:11 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-04-14 18:07 ` Ken Goldman
2020-04-15 2:53 ` Tianjia Zhang [this message]
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=7335613b-0a18-1c28-9b65-687d0b44d01f@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kgold@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®