On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 02:22:45PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > James Bottomley <[email protected]> wrote on 01/04/2017 02:05:35 PM: > > > From: James Bottomley <[email protected]> > > To: Stefan Berger/Watson/IBM@IBMUS > > Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <[email protected]>, tpmdd- > > [email protected], Jason Gunthorpe > <[email protected]> > > Date: 01/04/2017 02:05 PM > > Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/4] tpm: validate TPM 2.0 > commands > > > > On Wed, 2017-01-04 at 13:59 -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > > > [ 67.699811] WARNING: CPU: 12 PID: 870 at mm/page_alloc.c:3511 > > > > What's the code context around this line in your source? Or what > > kernel version? If it's this > > > > if (order >= MAX_ORDER) { > > WARN_ON_ONCE(!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN)); > > return NULL; > > } > > > > I am running Jarkko's tree, the tabrm branch. 4.9.0-rc5 I think. I have > exactly what you are showing above. > > Then I think you may have returned bogus data to TPM_PT_TOTAL_COMMANDS; > > perhaps print nr_commands. > > Ha, what is likely the cause here is that the test suite, which implements > only a few commands to respond to the kernel with from the vtpm proxy > side, isn't feeding good data to the driver and the nr_commands ends up > being 0... or actually bogus data / not initialized. I guess the function > should check for valid input.
So, what kind of validation do you suggest? Checking it whether it is zero? /Jarkko ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. Training and support from Colfax. Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
