Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] efi: call get_event_log before ExitBootServices

Jarkko Sakkinen <[email protected]>
Newsgroups net.sourceforge.lists.tpmdd-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-efi,org.kernel.vger.linux-integrity,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:12:27PM +0200, Thiebaud Weksteen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 08:16:17PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 02:49:31PM +0200, Thiebaud Weksteen wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen
> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:13:39AM +0200, Thiebaud Weksteen wrote:
> >> > >> With TPM 2.0 specification, the event logs may only be accessible by
> >> > >> calling an EFI Boot Service. Modify the EFI stub to copy the log area to
> >> > >> a new Linux-specific EFI configuration table so it remains accessible
> >> > >> once booted.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> When calling this service, it is possible to specify the expected format
> >> > >> of the logs: TPM 1.2 (SHA1) or TPM 2.0 ("Crypto Agile"). For now, only the
> >> > >> first format is retrieved.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Signed-off-by: Thiebaud Weksteen <[email protected]>
> >> > >
> >> > > Does not apply:
> >> > >
> >> > > Applying: tpm: move tpm_eventlog.h outside of drivers folder
> >> > > Applying: tpm: rename event log provider files
> >> > > Applying: tpm: add event log format version
> >> > > Applying: efi: call get_event_log before ExitBootServices
> >> > > error: sha1 information is lacking or useless (drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c).
> >> > > error: could not build fake ancestor
> >> > > Patch failed at 0004 efi: call get_event_log before ExitBootServices
> >> > > The copy of the patch that failed is found in: .git/rebase-apply/patch
> >> > > When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
> >> > > If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
> >> > > To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
> >> > >
> >> > > Just rebased my tree to the latest security-next.
> >> >
> >> > It applies fine on security/next-general which is more up-to-date.
> >> > (security/next does not include
> >> > ccc829ba3624beb9a703fc995d016b836d9eead8 on which this patch set is
> >> > based)
> >>
> >> Thanks, my bad, I though that I had it updated.
> >>
> >> I'll update my tree and retry.
> >>
> >> /Jarkko
> >
> > My master is up to date with security/next.
> >
> > Still get the same result:
> >
> > $ git am -3 ~/Downloads/v3-4-5-efi-call-get_event_log-before-ExitBootServices.patch
> > Applying: efi: call get_event_log before ExitBootServices
> > error: sha1 information is lacking or useless (drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c).
> > error: could not build fake ancestor
> > Patch failed at 0001 efi: call get_event_log before ExitBootServices
> > The copy of the patch that failed is found in: .git/rebase-apply/patch
> > When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
> > If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
> > To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
> >
> > Maybe you have some other trees fetched in your local GIT so that it
> > finds the ancestors? Anyway, cannot test this at this point.
> >
> > /Jarkko
> 
> The security/next branch still does not contain the commit I mentioned
> (ccc829ba3624beb9a703fc995d016b836d9eead8), which is already part of
> torvalds/master now.
> 
>  $ git branch -a --contains ccc829ba3624beb9a703fc995d016b836d9eead8
>   efi_tpm2_eventlog
>   master
>   remotes/linux-next/akpm
>   remotes/linux-next/akpm-base
>   remotes/linux-next/master
>   remotes/linux-next/stable
>   remotes/security/fixes-v4.14-rc3
>   remotes/security/fixes-v4.14-rc4
>   remotes/security/next-general
>   remotes/security/next-testing
>   remotes/torvalds/master
> 
> Is there any reason why you are trying to merge on that specific
> branch and not next-general or next-testing? Would you know the
> purpose of all these next-* branches?
> 
> Thanks,
> Thiebaud

The way I've agreed with James Morris to have my tree is to be rooted to
security trees next branch.

James, what actions should we take?

/Jarkko
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.