| 2020-06-02 06:51:35 |
Ivan Hu |
bug |
|
|
added bug |
| 2020-06-02 06:51:48 |
Ivan Hu |
description |
Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Impact]
It has been reported that some TIS based TPMs are giving unexpected errors when using the O_NONBLOCK path of the TPM device. The problem is that some TPMs don't like it when you get and then relinquish a locality (as the tpm_try_get_ops()/tpm_put_ops() pair does) without sending a command. This currently happens all the time in the O_NONBLOCK write path. This affects Nuvoton TPMs and was a regression caused by the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode").
Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Fix]
Fix this by moving the tpm_try_get_ops()
further down the code to after the O_NONBLOCK determination is made.
This is safe because the priv->buffer_mutex still protects the priv
state being modified.
[Regression Risk]
Low. This patch only for fix the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode"). |
[Impact]
It has been reported that some TIS based TPMs are giving unexpected errors when using the O_NONBLOCK path of the TPM device. The problem is that some TPMs don't like it when you get and then relinquish a locality (as the tpm_try_get_ops()/tpm_put_ops() pair does) without sending a command. This currently happens all the time in the O_NONBLOCK write path. This affects Nuvoton TPMs and was a regression caused by the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode").
Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Fix]
Fix this by moving the tpm_try_get_ops()
further down the code to after the O_NONBLOCK determination is made.
This is safe because the priv->buffer_mutex still protects the priv
state being modified.
[Regression Risk]
Low. This patch only for fix the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode"). |
|
| 2020-06-02 06:51:56 |
Ivan Hu |
description |
[Impact]
It has been reported that some TIS based TPMs are giving unexpected errors when using the O_NONBLOCK path of the TPM device. The problem is that some TPMs don't like it when you get and then relinquish a locality (as the tpm_try_get_ops()/tpm_put_ops() pair does) without sending a command. This currently happens all the time in the O_NONBLOCK write path. This affects Nuvoton TPMs and was a regression caused by the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode").
Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Fix]
Fix this by moving the tpm_try_get_ops()
further down the code to after the O_NONBLOCK determination is made.
This is safe because the priv->buffer_mutex still protects the priv
state being modified.
[Regression Risk]
Low. This patch only for fix the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode"). |
[Impact]
It has been reported that some TIS based TPMs are giving unexpected errors when using the O_NONBLOCK path of the TPM device. The problem is that some TPMs don't like it when you get and then relinquish a locality (as the tpm_try_get_ops()/tpm_put_ops() pair does) without sending a command. This currently happens all the time in the O_NONBLOCK write path. This affects Nuvoton TPMs and was a regression caused by the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode").
Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Fix]
Fix this by moving the tpm_try_get_ops()
further down the code to after the O_NONBLOCK determination is made.
This is safe because the priv->buffer_mutex still protects the priv
state being modified.
[Regression Risk]
Low. This patch only for fix the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode"). |
|
| 2020-06-02 06:59:49 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu) |
|
| 2020-06-02 07:00:14 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu) |
|
| 2020-06-02 07:00:16 |
Ubuntu Kernel Bot |
linux (Ubuntu): status |
New |
Incomplete |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:05 |
Ivan Hu |
nominated for series |
|
Ubuntu Focal |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:05 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux (Ubuntu Focal) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:05 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Focal) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:05 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Focal) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:17 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task deleted |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Focal) |
|
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:32 |
Ivan Hu |
nominated for series |
|
Ubuntu Bionic |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:32 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux (Ubuntu Bionic) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:32 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Bionic) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:32 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task added |
|
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Bionic) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:39 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task deleted |
linux (Ubuntu Bionic) |
|
|
| 2020-06-02 09:01:42 |
Ivan Hu |
bug task deleted |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Bionic) |
|
|
| 2020-06-02 09:03:00 |
AceLan Kao |
linux (Ubuntu): status |
Incomplete |
Invalid |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:03:03 |
AceLan Kao |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu): status |
New |
Invalid |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:03:06 |
AceLan Kao |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu): status |
New |
Invalid |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:07:49 |
Ivan Hu |
linux (Ubuntu Focal): assignee |
|
Ivan Hu (ivan.hu) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:07:52 |
Ivan Hu |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Focal): assignee |
|
Ivan Hu (ivan.hu) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:07:55 |
Ivan Hu |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Bionic): assignee |
|
Ivan Hu (ivan.hu) |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:07:59 |
Ivan Hu |
linux (Ubuntu Focal): status |
New |
In Progress |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:08:01 |
Ivan Hu |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Focal): status |
New |
In Progress |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:08:04 |
Ivan Hu |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Bionic): status |
New |
In Progress |
|
| 2020-06-02 09:11:00 |
Ivan Hu |
description |
[Impact]
It has been reported that some TIS based TPMs are giving unexpected errors when using the O_NONBLOCK path of the TPM device. The problem is that some TPMs don't like it when you get and then relinquish a locality (as the tpm_try_get_ops()/tpm_put_ops() pair does) without sending a command. This currently happens all the time in the O_NONBLOCK write path. This affects Nuvoton TPMs and was a regression caused by the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode").
Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Fix]
Fix this by moving the tpm_try_get_ops()
further down the code to after the O_NONBLOCK determination is made.
This is safe because the priv->buffer_mutex still protects the priv
state being modified.
[Regression Risk]
Low. This patch only for fix the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode"). |
[Impact]
It has been reported that some TIS based TPMs are giving unexpected errors when using the O_NONBLOCK path of the TPM device. The problem is that some TPMs don't like it when you get and then relinquish a locality (as the tpm_try_get_ops()/tpm_put_ops() pair does) without sending a command. This currently happens all the time in the O_NONBLOCK write path. This affects Nuvoton TPMs and was a regression caused by the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode").
PatchLink: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11576453/
[Fix]
Fix this by moving the tpm_try_get_ops()
further down the code to after the O_NONBLOCK determination is made.
This is safe because the priv->buffer_mutex still protects the priv
state being modified.
[Regression Risk]
Low. This patch only for fix the patch d23d12484307 ("tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING mode"). |
|
| 2020-06-05 05:57:49 |
Khaled El Mously |
linux (Ubuntu Focal): status |
In Progress |
Fix Committed |
|
| 2020-06-10 17:42:21 |
Ubuntu Kernel Bot |
tags |
|
verification-needed-focal |
|
| 2020-06-12 07:58:25 |
Timo Aaltonen |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Focal): status |
In Progress |
Fix Committed |
|
| 2020-06-12 09:29:04 |
AceLan Kao |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Bionic): status |
In Progress |
Fix Committed |
|
| 2020-06-12 11:15:08 |
AceLan Kao |
tags |
verification-needed-focal |
verification-done-focal |
|
| 2020-07-01 10:25:25 |
Launchpad Janitor |
linux (Ubuntu Focal): status |
Fix Committed |
Fix Released |
|
| 2020-07-01 10:25:25 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2020-0543 |
|
| 2020-07-01 10:25:25 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2020-13143 |
|
| 2020-07-01 10:26:50 |
Launchpad Janitor |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu Focal): status |
Fix Committed |
Fix Released |
|
| 2020-07-01 10:33:31 |
Launchpad Janitor |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu Bionic): status |
Fix Committed |
Fix Released |
|
| 2020-07-01 10:33:31 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2020-10711 |
|
| 2020-07-28 00:57:35 |
Launchpad Janitor |
linux-oem-5.6 (Ubuntu): status |
Invalid |
Fix Released |
|
| 2020-07-28 00:57:39 |
Launchpad Janitor |
linux (Ubuntu): status |
Invalid |
Fix Released |
|
| 2020-07-28 00:57:39 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2019-16089 |
|
| 2020-07-28 00:57:39 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2019-19642 |
|
| 2020-07-28 00:57:39 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2020-11935 |
|
| 2020-08-12 14:58:25 |
Launchpad Janitor |
linux-oem-osp1 (Ubuntu): status |
Invalid |
Fix Released |
|
| 2020-08-12 14:58:25 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2019-12380 |
|
| 2020-08-12 14:58:25 |
Launchpad Janitor |
cve linked |
|
2020-10757 |
|
