Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

tcti-libtpms: fix big endian response size. #2701

Conversation

JuergenReppSIT
Copy link
Member

size_t was used for the sizes determined by the TPMLIB_Process call. TPMLIB_Process uses uint32_t values. This did work on little endian architectures. On big endian architectures wrong sizes were computed by the tcti receive function. Now uint32_t parameters are used for the TPMLIB_Process call.

Signed-off-by: Juergen Repp juergen_repp@web.de

size_t was used for the sizes determined by the TPMLIB_Process call.
TPMLIB_Process uses uint32_t values. This did work on little endian
architectures. On big endian architectures wrong sizes were computed
by the tcti receive function. Now uint32_t parameters are used for
the TPMLIB_Process call.

Signed-off-by: Juergen Repp <juergen_repp@web.de>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 2, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #2701 (9ecfec7) into master (d0632da) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.
The diff coverage is 41.66%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2701      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.57%   82.59%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         368      368              
  Lines       42986    42998      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits        35496    35516      +20     
+ Misses       7490     7482       -8     
Files Coverage Δ
src/tss2-tcti/tcti-libtpms.c 86.71% <41.66%> (-3.26%) ⬇️

... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@JuergenReppSIT
Copy link
Member Author

was already fixed by #2675.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant