Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] tpm: vtpm_proxy: Implement new ioctl to get supported flags

[Stefan Berger]

On 05/04/2017 01:20 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 01:13:18PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > On 05/04/2017 11:34 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 10:56:25AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > > > Implement VTPM_PROXY_IOC_GET_SUPT_FLAGS ioctl to get the bitmask
> > > > of flags that the vtpm_proxy driver supports in the
> > > > VTPM_PROXY_IOC_NEW_DEV ioctl. This helps user space in deciding
> > > > which flags to set in that ioctl.
> > > you might be better off just having a VTPM_PROXY_IO_ENABLE_FEATURE
> > > .feature = LOCALITY
> > Do you have an example driver that shows how to do this ? Can user space
> > query that feature?
> Try and enable the feature, if it fails then there is no feature in
> the kernel.
>
> This is the usual way to add new syscalls..
>
> > > If that fails then the feature is not supported, no real need for the
> > > query in that case.
> > >
> > > Not sure about Jarkko's point on request/release locality.. Is there a
> > > scenario where the emulator should fail the request locality?
> > We could filter localities 5 and higher on the level of the driver (patch
> > 2/3) since basically there are only 5 localities (0-4) in any TPM interface
> > today. The typical hardware locality 4 would be filtered by the emulator per
> > policy passed via command line, but I would allow it on the level of this
> > driver. An error message would be returned for any command executed in that
> > locality, unless the 'policy' allows it. Localities 0-3 should just be
> > selectable. The TPM TIS (in the hardware) implements some complicated scheme
> > when it comes to allowing the selection of a locality and I would say we
> > need none of that but just tell the vTPM proxy driver the locality (patch
> > 2/3) in which the next command will be executed.
> Well, if TIS hardware has some scheme I feel like the emulator uAPI should
> have enough fidelity to ecompass existing hardware, even if your
> current emulator does not need it.
>
> So allowing request_locality to fail from userspace seems reasonable.

What's the best interface to use for this ?