From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from the.earth.li (the.earth.li [93.93.131.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76D522010E8; Thu, 3 Apr 2025 20:43:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=93.93.131.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743713010; cv=none; b=Nw3++sy0rxICtSM65pF5Zcm0ijkSKMo5u4ri4yM2Ts0J2UP3QEf+LcMgwDNjyahCIK/uL1/nix2jo0CLbdlcqjvZf3n4SfPB18DBKmt7yN/ADn/iFk+CPly/6RV1TdCFxDwyq7UjSC576DJFljRyEwSRH1pB22ZomqBvfp7nYP0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743713010; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z6AjCiX55b2ls3ukJbErpaiU+cdMDwLkhdMXgsJVwDU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=JCI9Ha/zHKh6nlRfxeNwK8Gynet+ffBSiHIpacH7MLBhhShakSvQMWdekNKWq7oVgq4EO5YtOEFUmE5cI3fsv2e5trTogDxRvVehMaempOYfWEEVwiQsTBhjzaA9bOnCeJh+Yeq5DeQviEXthvGIYCUwtxWYWFsjGkKsbS4QtM4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=earth.li; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=earth.li; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=earth.li header.i=@earth.li header.b=OCTXJd4s; arc=none smtp.client-ip=93.93.131.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=earth.li Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=earth.li Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=earth.li header.i=@earth.li header.b="OCTXJd4s" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=earth.li; s=the; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject: Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=fZj5xEBVPcFI3ae7bqQp+lq69uF7xTX+XTtVKf/jG+A=; b=OCTXJd4swL2/t46/ZwVEzf2BDl HCeuiVJsGDYbPxYeHr3X5iT4vVThPE5O3SiBDtvLIbuq19ycBbDIKp3GI8s0z1g+wqMp4MBnHHh16 K2gtUoZ37E91iz0rOflZvhTKIarFFTxicg7s07cPt53MMjrHpJF4aHrlunXh//JdbjGHPbTuzDaxt wScyyhD2w6gWgzfgHP30xlj0AgKB89SzWkYZDoEIpvErsuDtPX2JZ/22KgoFydUpI2n+8kbh/rPTt lQLZhidzdTzWV7x2K90Chxfd3MhR/N3NyveVd+yLorSC0Ljm9L5ZgYiDMmQe72qY4kUHZSF8LKME4 O4isR4YQ==; Received: from noodles by the.earth.li with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u0RPD-00DdeO-0u; Thu, 03 Apr 2025 21:43:19 +0100 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:43:19 +0100 From: Jonathan McDowell To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: Michal Suchanek , Peter Huewe , Jason Gunthorpe , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: tis: Increase the default for timeouts B and C Message-ID: References: <20250402172134.7751-1-msuchanek@suse.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 09:45:21PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 06:45:40PM +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 07:21:30PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> > With some Infineon chips the timeouts in tpm_tis_send_data (both B and >> > C) can reach up to about 2250 ms. >> > >> > Extend the timeout duration to accommodate this. >> >> The problem here is the bump of timeout_c is going to interact poorly with >> the Infineon errata workaround, as now we'll wait 4s instead of 200ms to >> detect the stuck status change. >> >> (Also shouldn't timeout_c already end up as 750ms, as it's >> max(TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT, TPM2_TIMEOUT_C), and TIS_SHORT_TIMEOUT is 750 vs 200 >> for TPM2_TIMEOUT_C? That doesn't seem to be borne out by your logs, nor my >> results.) > >Just noticed that the commit did not end up having fixes etc. tags: > >https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jarkko/linux-tpmdd.git/commit/?id=de9e33df7762abbfc2a1568291f2c3a3154c6a9d > >Should we forward to stable? It's a TPM bug rather than a kernel issue, so I don't think there's a valid Fixes: for it, but it's certainly stable material in my mind. J. -- ... "It only counts as a lie-in if you don't get dressed before tea time." -- Steve Willison