| Message ID | 20191025193103.30226-1-jsnitsel@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] tpm: Add major_version sysfs file | expand |
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". /Jarkko
On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: >> + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 >> + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > >This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > >/Jarkko Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the file name, major_version versus version_major?
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > /Jarkko > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the file name, > major_version versus version_major? Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's feedback for this. /Jarkko
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the file name, > > major_version versus version_major? > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's > feedback for this. $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahci_host_version /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version etc.. Not a single example of the backward version. Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' Jason
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the file name, > > > major_version versus version_major? > > > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is > > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's > > feedback for this. > > $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahci_host_version > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version > /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version > > etc.. > > Not a single example of the backward version. > > Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' The postfix gives tells the part of the version number that the file reports. If you really want to add the prefix, then the appropriate name would be tpm_version_major. I'd still go with just version_major as tpm_ prefix is somewhat redundant. /Jarkko
On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:22 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & > > > > > > TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > > > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the > > > > file name, > > > > major_version versus version_major? > > > > > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is > > > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's > > > feedback for this. > > > > $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahc > > i_host_version > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version > > /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version > > > > etc.. > > > > Not a single example of the backward version. > > > > Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' > > The postfix gives tells the part of the version number that the file > reports. If you really want to add the prefix, then the appropriate > name would be tpm_version_major. > > I'd still go with just version_major as tpm_ prefix is somewhat > redundant. You have to be careful with overly generic names in sysfs ... this is what happened to us in SCSI: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=42caa0edabd6a0a392ec36a5f0943924e4954311 That's not to say version_major is wrong ... plenty of sysfs files have generic names like this, it's just that tpm_version_major might be more future proof. James
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 07:56:48AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:22 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & > > > > > > > TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > > > > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > > > > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the > > > > > file name, > > > > > major_version versus version_major? > > > > > > > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is > > > > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's > > > > feedback for this. > > > > > > $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" > > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahc > > > i_host_version > > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version > > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version > > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version > > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version > > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version > > > /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version > > > > > > etc.. > > > > > > Not a single example of the backward version. > > > > > > Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' > > > > The postfix gives tells the part of the version number that the file > > reports. If you really want to add the prefix, then the appropriate > > name would be tpm_version_major. > > > > I'd still go with just version_major as tpm_ prefix is somewhat > > redundant. > > You have to be careful with overly generic names in sysfs ... this is > what happened to us in SCSI: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=42caa0edabd6a0a392ec36a5f0943924e4954311 > > That's not to say version_major is wrong ... plenty of sysfs files have > generic names like this, it's just that tpm_version_major might be more > future proof. Indeed, it is a bit a global namespace, so nothing wrong with adding tpm_ Jason
On Tue Oct 29 19, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 07:56:48AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: >> On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:22 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: >> > > > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & >> > > > > > > TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 >> > > > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); >> > > > > > >> > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". >> > > > > > >> > > > > > /Jarkko >> > > > > >> > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the >> > > > > file name, >> > > > > major_version versus version_major? >> > > > >> > > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is >> > > > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's >> > > > feedback for this. >> > > >> > > $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" >> > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahc >> > > i_host_version >> > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version >> > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version >> > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version >> > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version >> > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version >> > > /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version >> > > >> > > etc.. >> > > >> > > Not a single example of the backward version. >> > > >> > > Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' >> > >> > The postfix gives tells the part of the version number that the file >> > reports. If you really want to add the prefix, then the appropriate >> > name would be tpm_version_major. >> > >> > I'd still go with just version_major as tpm_ prefix is somewhat >> > redundant. >> >> You have to be careful with overly generic names in sysfs ... this is >> what happened to us in SCSI: >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=42caa0edabd6a0a392ec36a5f0943924e4954311 >> >> That's not to say version_major is wrong ... plenty of sysfs files have >> generic names like this, it's just that tpm_version_major might be more >> future proof. > >Indeed, it is a bit a global namespace, so nothing wrong with adding >tpm_ > >Jason So tpm_version_major?
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 07:56:48AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:22 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & > > > > > > > TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > > > > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > > > > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the > > > > > file name, > > > > > major_version versus version_major? > > > > > > > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is > > > > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's > > > > feedback for this. > > > > > > $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" > > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahc > > > i_host_version > > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version > > > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version > > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version > > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version > > > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version > > > /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version > > > > > > etc.. > > > > > > Not a single example of the backward version. > > > > > > Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' > > > > The postfix gives tells the part of the version number that the file > > reports. If you really want to add the prefix, then the appropriate > > name would be tpm_version_major. > > > > I'd still go with just version_major as tpm_ prefix is somewhat > > redundant. > > You have to be careful with overly generic names in sysfs ... this is > what happened to us in SCSI: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=42caa0edabd6a0a392ec36a5f0943924e4954311 > > That's not to say version_major is wrong ... plenty of sysfs files have > generic names like this, it's just that tpm_version_major might be more > future proof. I'm cool with that name as long as the postfix also stays. /Jarkko
diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-class-tpm b/Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-class-tpm index c0e23830f56a..c6bd02bafafd 100644 --- a/Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-class-tpm +++ b/Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-class-tpm @@ -183,3 +183,14 @@ Description: The "timeouts" property shows the 4 vendor-specific values The four timeout values are shown in usecs, with a trailing "[original]" or "[adjusted]" depending on whether the values were scaled by the driver to be reported in usec from msecs. + +What: /sys/class/tpm/tpmX/major_version +Date: October 2019 +KernelVersion: 5.5 +Contact: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org +Description: The "major_version" property shows the TCG spec version + implemented by the TPM device. + + Example output: + + 2.0 diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c index edfa89160010..9372c2d6f0b3 100644 --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c @@ -309,7 +309,17 @@ static ssize_t timeouts_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, } static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(timeouts); -static struct attribute *tpm_dev_attrs[] = { +static ssize_t major_version_show(struct device *dev, + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) +{ + struct tpm_chip *chip = to_tpm_chip(dev); + + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); +} +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(major_version); + +static struct attribute *tpm12_dev_attrs[] = { &dev_attr_pubek.attr, &dev_attr_pcrs.attr, &dev_attr_enabled.attr, @@ -320,18 +330,28 @@ static struct attribute *tpm_dev_attrs[] = { &dev_attr_cancel.attr, &dev_attr_durations.attr, &dev_attr_timeouts.attr, + &dev_attr_major_version.attr, NULL, }; -static const struct attribute_group tpm_dev_group = { - .attrs = tpm_dev_attrs, +static struct attribute *tpm20_dev_attrs[] = { + &dev_attr_major_version.attr, + NULL +}; + +static const struct attribute_group tpm12_dev_group = { + .attrs = tpm12_dev_attrs, +}; + +static const struct attribute_group tpm20_dev_group = { + .attrs = tpm20_dev_attrs, }; void tpm_sysfs_add_device(struct tpm_chip *chip) { - if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) - return; - WARN_ON(chip->groups_cnt != 0); - chip->groups[chip->groups_cnt++] = &tpm_dev_group; + if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) + chip->groups[chip->groups_cnt++] = &tpm20_dev_group; + else + chip->groups[chip->groups_cnt++] = &tpm12_dev_group; }
Easily determining what TCG version a tpm device implements has been a pain point for userspace for a long time, so add a sysfs file to report the TCG version of a tpm device. Also add an entry to Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-class-tpm describing the new file. Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com> --- v2: - Fix TCG usage in commit message. - Add entry to sysfs-class-tpm in Documentation/ABI/stable Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-class-tpm | 11 ++++++++ drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++----- 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)