[PATCH v9 1/4] KEYS: trusted: Add generic trusted keys framework
sumit.garg at linaro.org
Thu Apr 22 04:47:02 UTC 2021
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 at 22:51, James Bottomley <jejb at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-04-21 at 16:38 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > Hi James,
> > On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 at 04:47, James Bottomley <jejb at linux.ibm.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 18:41 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > > > Current trusted keys framework is tightly coupled to use TPM
> > > > device as an underlying implementation which makes it difficult
> > > > for implementations like Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) etc.
> > > > to provide trusted keys support in case platform doesn't posses a
> > > > TPM device.
> > > >
> > > > Add a generic trusted keys framework where underlying
> > > > implementations can be easily plugged in. Create struct
> > > > trusted_key_ops to achieve this, which contains necessary
> > > > functions of a backend.
> > > >
> > > > Also, define a module parameter in order to select a particular
> > > > trust source in case a platform support multiple trust sources.
> > > > In case its not specified then implementation itetrates through
> > > > trust sources list starting with TPM and assign the first trust
> > > > source as a backend which has initiazed successfully during
> > > > iteration.
> > > >
> > > > Note that current implementation only supports a single trust
> > > > source at runtime which is either selectable at compile time or
> > > > during boot via aforementioned module parameter.
> > >
> > > You never actually tested this, did you? I'm now getting EINVAL
> > > from all the trusted TPM key operations because of this patch.
> > >
> > Unfortunately, I don't possess a development machine with a TPM
> > device. So mine testing was entirely based on TEE as a backend which
> > doesn't support any optional parameters. And that being the reason I
> > didn't catch this issue at first instance.
> > Is there any TPM emulation environment available that I can use for
> > testing?
> Well use the same as we all use: A software TPM running in the host
> coupled with a virtual machine guest for the kernel:
> It doesn't catch interface issues (like TIS timeouts) but it does catch
> TPM operations problems like this patch had.
Thanks for the pointer. I will use it for future testing.
More information about the OP-TEE