As Ian Lepore noted, writing ~1 to a register might have a completely
different effect than doing a regular read-modify-write operation.
Follow the TCG_PC_Client_Platform_TPM_Profile_PTP_2.0_r1.03_v22
datasheet instead, and use the actual values mentioned there:
(uint32_t)1 to cancel the command, (uint32_t)0 to clear the field.
MFC after: 3 days
tpmtis_go_ready() read the value of the TPM_STS register, ORed
TPM_STS_CMD_READY with it, and wrote it back. However, the TPM Profile
(PTP) specification states that only one bit in the write request value may
be set to 1, or else the entire write request is ignored.
Fix by just writing TPM_STS_CMD_READY.
Similarly, remove the call which clears the TPM_STS_CMD_READY flag in the
same function. It was being ignored for the same reason.
Submitted by: Darrick Lew <darrick.freebsd AT gmail.com>
Reviewed by: vangyzen, myself
MFC after: if you care about stable, you might want to do so
Sponsored by: Dell EMC Isilon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D23081
operations to a boolean in tpm(4):
sys/dev/tpm/tpm_crb.c:301:32: error: converting the result of '<<' to a boolean; did you mean '(1 << (0)) != 0'? [-Werror,-Wint-in-bool-context]
WR4(sc, TPM_CRB_CTRL_CANCEL, !TPM_CRB_CTRL_CANCEL_CMD);
^
sys/dev/tpm/tpm_crb.c:73:34: note: expanded from macro 'TPM_CRB_CTRL_CANCEL_CMD'
#define TPM_CRB_CTRL_CANCEL_CMD BIT(0)
^
sys/dev/tpm/tpm20.h:60:19: note: expanded from macro 'BIT'
#define BIT(x) (1 << (x))
^
In this case, the intent was to clear the zeroth bit, and leave the rest
unaffected. Therefore, the ~ operator should be used instead.
Noticed by: cem
MFC after: 3 days
Check caller thread id before allowing to read the buffer
to make sure that it can only be accessed by the thread that
did the associated write to the TPM.
Submitted by: Kornel Duleba <mindal@semihalf.com>
Reviewed by: delphij
Obtained from: Semihalf
Sponsored by: Stormshield
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D19713
Harvesting has to compete for the TPM chip with userspace.
Before this change the callout could hijack an unread buffer
causing a userspace call to the TPM to fail.
Submitted by: Kornel Duleba <mindal@semihalf.com>
Reviewed by: delphij
Obtained from: Semihalf
Sponsored by: Stormshield
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D19712
TPM has a built-in RNG, with its own entropy source.
The driver was extended to harvest 16 random bytes from TPM every 10 seconds.
A new build option "TPM_HARVEST" was introduced - for now, however, it
is not enabled by default in the GENERIC config.
Submitted by: Kornel Duleba <mindal@semihalf.com>
Reviewed by: markm, delphij
Approved by: secteam
Obtained from: Semihalf
Sponsored by: Stormshield
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D19620
Move static variable definition (cdevsw) to a more conventional location
(the C file it is used in), rather than a header.
This fixes the GCC warning, -Wunused-variable ("defined but not used") when
the tpm20.h header is included in files other than tpm20.c (e.g.,
tpm_tis.c).
X-MFC-with: r342084
Sponsored by: Dell EMC Isilon
On amd64 the RSP address can be read in single 8-byte transaction,
which is obviously not possible on 32-bit platforms. Fix that
by performing 2 4-byte read on them.
Obtained from: Semihalf
Sponsored by: Stormshield
It was written basing on:
TCG PC Client Platform TPM Profile (PTP) Specification Version 22, Revision 1.03.
It only supports Locality 0. Interrupts are only supported in FIFO mode.
The driver in FIFO mode was tested on x86 with Infineon SLB9665 discrete TPM chip.
Driver in both modes was also tested on qemu with swtpm running on host.
Submitted by: Kornel Duleba <mindal@semihalf.com>
Obtained from: Semihalf
Sponsored by: Stormshield
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18048
Several files use the internal name of `struct device` instead of
`device_t` which is part of the public API. This patch changes all
`struct device *` to `device_t`.
The remaining occurrences of `struct device` are those referring to the
Linux or OpenBSD version of the structure, or the code is not built on
FreeBSD and it's unclear what to do.
Submitted by: Matthew Macy <mmacy@nextbsd.org> (previous version)
Approved by: emaste, jhibbits, sbruno
MFC after: 3 days
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D7447
