Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest? I'm finishing off now 0.11 version of the tool, which will take some time (versions before that are honestly quite bad, don't try them) but after that this would be something I'd like to put together.
NOTE: while tpm2-protocol itself is Apache/MIT, tpm2sh is GPL3 licensed command-line program (for what it is worth).
[1] https://github.com/puavo-org/tpm2sh [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jarkko/tpm2-protocol.git/abo...
BR, Jarkko
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:48:22PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest? I'm finishing off now 0.11 version of the tool, which will take some time (versions before that are honestly quite bad, don't try them) but after that this would be something I'd like to put together.
NOTE: while tpm2-protocol itself is Apache/MIT, tpm2sh is GPL3 licensed command-line program (for what it is worth).
Also tpm2-protocol is dependencyless, no crazy corporate TPM2 shenanigans and daemons involved etc., meaning that overall tpm2sh is quite self-contained and good fit but 8 KSLOC not really to be imported (the size comes from built-in TPM2 emulator, policy expression language and advanced import functionality that directly converts PKCS#8 to TPM2 Key ASN.1 DEr/PEM all super useful for all sorts of testing purposes).
[1] https://github.com/puavo-org/tpm2sh [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jarkko/tpm2-protocol.git/abo...
BR, Jarkko
On 9/16/25 07:48, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest? I'm finishing off now 0.11 version of the tool, which will take some time (versions before that are honestly quite bad, don't try them) but after that this would be something I'd like to put together.
Probably fine - how does this impact kselftest default run?
NOTE: while tpm2-protocol itself is Apache/MIT, tpm2sh is GPL3 licensed command-line program (for what it is worth).
[1] https://github.com/puavo-org/tpm2sh [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jarkko/tpm2-protocol.git/abo...
BR, Jarkko
thanks, -- Shuah
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:39:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/16/25 07:48, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest? I'm finishing off now 0.11 version of the tool, which will take some time (versions before that are honestly quite bad, don't try them) but after that this would be something I'd like to put together.
Probably fine - how does this impact kselftest default run?
OK so this was early query: I might introduce such test as part of series that hasa waited for long time for an update [1]. I can use tpm2sh more easily to reproduce equivalent crypto as kernel does and make a test that can compare the results in a meaningful manner. I also plan to relocate tpm2sh as part of git.kernel.org custody from Github, as its main dependency tpm2-protocol crate already is [2].
I went over the top in the original mail: most definitely it makes sense to retain the pre-existing test, and such "Rust-enhanced" test should be conditional, and can instead of depending on cargo simply do "command -v" in order to check the existence of tpm2sh and output installation instructions if it is missing.
With those precautions it should be somewhat harmless unless you actually want to run that test.
Thanks for quick response!
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20240528210823.28798-1-jarkko@kernel... [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jarkko/tpm2-protocol.git
BR, Jarkko
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 06:06:31PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:39:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/16/25 07:48, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest? I'm finishing off now 0.11 version of the tool, which will take some time (versions before that are honestly quite bad, don't try them) but after that this would be something I'd like to put together.
Probably fine - how does this impact kselftest default run?
OK so this was early query: I might introduce such test as part of series that hasa waited for long time for an update [1]. I can use tpm2sh more easily to reproduce equivalent crypto as kernel does and make a test that can compare the results in a meaningful manner. I also plan to relocate tpm2sh as part of git.kernel.org custody from Github, as its main dependency tpm2-protocol crate already is [2].
Some motivation context, I left out on doing the aforementioned patch set because I did not see importing TPM2 keys useful enough application but recently I've been dealing with remote attestation and that levels up the feature something quite useful.
I.e. so called attestation identity keys are persisted to the NVRAM of a TPM chip and it would great if kernel could at boot time reserve selected (in the command-line) NV indexes and wrap them up into keyring keys. Since in UKI model command-line is signed that effectively locks them in into controlled use only through keyring as kernel can guard that via the device.
I could put tons more detail into this but point to open up this complexity is that getting all cryptography right is easiest done by reproducing it in a test in user space and comparing the results, and Rust and the crate I did give sort of powerful way to describe all this. And also because of the complexity it needs to be anchroed with some kind of sufficient test.
BR, Jarkko
On 9/18/25 09:15, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 06:06:31PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:39:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/16/25 07:48, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest?
What is runner for kselftest in this context?
I'm finishing off now 0.11 version of the tool,
which will take some time (versions before that are honestly quite bad, don't try them) but after that this would be something I'd like to put together.
Probably fine - how does this impact kselftest default run?
OK so this was early query: I might introduce such test as part of series that hasa waited for long time for an update [1]. I can use tpm2sh more easily to reproduce equivalent crypto as kernel does and make a test that can compare the results in a meaningful manner. I also plan to relocate tpm2sh as part of git.kernel.org custody from Github, as its main dependency tpm2-protocol crate already is [2].
Some motivation context, I left out on doing the aforementioned patch set because I did not see importing TPM2 keys useful enough application but recently I've been dealing with remote attestation and that levels up the feature something quite useful.
I.e. so called attestation identity keys are persisted to the NVRAM of a TPM chip and it would great if kernel could at boot time reserve selected (in the command-line) NV indexes and wrap them up into keyring keys. Since in UKI model command-line is signed that effectively locks them in into controlled use only through keyring as kernel can guard that via the device.
I could put tons more detail into this but point to open up this complexity is that getting all cryptography right is easiest done by reproducing it in a test in user space and comparing the results, and Rust and the crate I did give sort of powerful way to describe all this. And also because of the complexity it needs to be anchroed with some kind of sufficient test.
I would say get this in a shape where you can share it for review. We can discuss the changes. One thing to keep in mind is dependencies for kselftest default run need to be minimal so these tests can run on rings with minimal tool support.
thanks, -- Shuah
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:04:13AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/18/25 09:15, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 06:06:31PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:39:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/16/25 07:48, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
Hi,
The pre-existing kselftest for TPM2 is derived works of my earlier Python based rudimentary TPM2 stack called 'tpm2-scripts'.
In order to get more coverage and more mainintainable and extensible test suite I'd like to eventually rewrite the tests with bash and tpm2sh, which is a TPM2 cli written with Rust and based on my new TPM2 stack [1] [2].
Given linux-rust work, would it be acceptable to require cargo to install a runner for kselftest?
What is runner for kselftest in this context?
It would really just a bash commanding tpm2sh and with conditional check the binding is kept loose.
BR, Jarkko
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Jarkko Sakkinen -
Shuah Khan