Attention is currently required from: Jason Glenesk, Raul Rangel, Michał Żygowski, Frans Hendriks, Matt DeVillier, Christian Walter, Julius Werner, Krystian Hebel, Fred Reitberger, Sergii Dmytruk, Felix Held.
Yu-Ping Wu has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160 )
Change subject: security/tpm: resolve conflicts in TSS implementations ......................................................................
Patch Set 8:
(6 comments)
File src/security/tpm/Makefile.inc:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160/comment/6b11723c_df60b8d6 PS8, Line 13: ramstage-y += tss/tss.c : romstage-y += tss/tss.c : bootblock-y += tss/tss.c : verstage-y += tss/tss.c : postcar-y += tss/tss.c Can use `all-y` for all classes (bootblock verstage romstage postcar ramstage).
File src/security/tpm/tss.h:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160/comment/3e8c476c_4ffd9ff9 PS8, Line 19: #include <security/tpm/tis.h> Sort the headers.
File src/security/tpm/tss/tss.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160/comment/378eba8e_53fecf91 PS8, Line 17: chose choose
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160/comment/7712adac_bbb78d57 PS8, Line 20: Extra blank line.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160/comment/1b9f60ae_ddee9817 PS8, Line 22: VB2_SUCCESS Not related to your change, but why does this function return VB2_*? Can't we just return something like 0/1/-1 here?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/69160/comment/4d2fe69b_39407363 PS8, Line 37: if (CONFIG(TPM1) && family == TPM_1) : return tlcl1_startup(); : if (CONFIG(TPM2) && family == TPM_2) : return tlcl2_startup(); : return TPM_E_INTERNAL_INCONSISTENCY; I wonder if we can define a macro to simplify the functions below:
``` #define TLCL_CALL(name, ...) do { if (CONFIG(TPM1) && family == TPM_1) return tlcl1_##name(__VA_ARGS__); ... } while (0) ```
Then we could use it like ``` TLCL_CALL(extend, pcr_num, in_digest, out_digest); ```