lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH v7 1/2] fTPM: firmware TPM running in TEE
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2019 11:11 AM
> To: Thirupathaiah Annapureddy <thiruan@microsoft.com>
> Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>; Sasha Levin
> <sashal@kernel.org>; peterhuewe@gmx.de; jgg@ziepe.ca; corbet@lwn.net; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-doc@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> integrity@vger.kernel.org; Microsoft Linux Kernel List <linux-
> kernel@microsoft.com>; Bryan Kelly (CSI) <bryankel@microsoft.com>; tee-
> dev@lists.linaro.org; sumit.garg@linaro.org; rdunlap@infradead.org; Joakim Bech
> <joakim.bech@linaro.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] fTPM: firmware TPM running in TEE
>
> Hi Thirupathaiah,
> [...]
> > > > > > I managed to do some quick testing in QEMU.
> > > > > > Everything works fine when i build this as a module (using IBM's TPM
> 2.0
> > > > > > TSS)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - As module
> > > > > > # insmod /lib/modules/5.2.0-
> rc1/kernel/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.ko
> > > > > > # getrandom -by 8
> > > > > > randomBytes length 8
> > > > > > 23 b9 3d c3 90 13 d9 6b
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Built-in
> > > > > > # dmesg | grep optee
> > > > > > ftpm-tee firmware:optee: ftpm_tee_probe:tee_client_open_session
> failed,
> > > > > > err=ffff0008
> > > > > This (0xffff0008) translates to TEE_ERROR_ITEM_NOT_FOUND.
> > > > >
> > > > > Where is fTPM TA located in the your test setup?
> > > > > Is it stitched into TEE binary as an EARLY_TA or
> > > > > Is it expected to be loaded during run-time with the help of user mode
> OP-
> > > TEE supplicant?
> > > > >
> > > > > My guess is that you are trying to load fTPM TA through user mode OP-
> TEE
> > > supplicant.
> > > > > Can you confirm?
> > > > I tried both
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ok apparently there was a failure with my built-in binary which i
> > > didn't notice. I did a full rebuilt and checked the elf this time :)
> > >
> > > Built as an earlyTA my error now is:
> > > ftpm-tee firmware:optee: ftpm_tee_probe:tee_client_open_session
> > > failed, err=ffff3024 (translates to TEE_ERROR_TARGET_DEAD)
> > > Since you tested it on real hardware i guess you tried both
> > > module/built-in. Which TEE version are you using?
> >
> > I am glad that the first issue (TEE_ERROR_ITEM_NOT_FOUND) is resolved after
> stitching
> > fTPM TA as an EARLY_TA.
> >
> > Regarding TEE_ERROR_TARGET_DEAD error, may I know which HW platform you are
> using to test?
>
> QEMU, on armv7
>
> > What is the preboot environment (UEFI or U-boot)?
> > Where is the secure storage in that HW platform?
> > I could think of two classes of secure storage.
> > 1. UFS/eMMC RPMB : If Supplicant in U-boot/UEFI initializes the
> > fTPM TA NV Storage, there should be no issue.
> > If fTPM TA NV storage is not initialized in pre-boot environment and you are
> using
> > built-in fTPM Linux driver, you can run into this issue as TA will try to
> initialize
> > NV store and fail.
> >
> > 2. other storage devices like QSPI accessible to only secure mode after
> > EBS/ReadyToBoot mile posts during boot. In this case, there should be no
> issue at all
> > as there is no dependency on non-secure side services provided by supplicant.
> >
>
> Please check the previous mail from Sumit. It explains exaclty what's going on.
> The tl;dr version is that the storage is up only when the supplicant is
> running.

I definitely know that OP-TEE can access storage only when the "user mode" supplicant
is running :). But fTPM NV storage should have been initialized in
in the preboot environment (UEFI/U-boot).

It would also be helpful to understand the overall use case/scenario (Measured boot?)you
are trying to exercise with the fTPM.

I also want to emphasize that this discussion is turning into more of how
fTPM gets integrated/enabled in a new HW platform.
fTPM is hosted in github and you definitely bring any issues/feature requests there.


>
> > If you let me know the HW platform details, I am happy to work with you to
> enable/integrate
> > fTPM TA on that HW platform.
> >
> Thanks,
> The hardware i am waiting for for has an eMMC RPMB. In theory the U-Boot
> supplicant support will be there so i'll be able to test it.
Can you give me the details of HW so that I can order one for myself?
Is it one of the 96boards?
The reason for the ask is that we have not upstreamd u-boot fTPM stack yet,
although we have future plans for it.

--Thiru

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-05 04:41    [W:0.064 / U:4.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site