From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=134.134.136.65; helo=mga03.intel.com; envelope-from=chao.b.zhang@intel.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5D6B222630A5 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 18:57:10 -0800 (PST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Feb 2018 19:03:11 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,381,1515484800"; d="scan'208,217";a="19778097" Received: from fmsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.201]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2018 19:03:11 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx123.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.38) by FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 19:03:11 -0800 Received: from shsmsx151.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.50) by fmsmsx123.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 19:03:10 -0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.124]) by SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.116]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:03:08 +0800 From: "Zhang, Chao B" To: "Lin, Derek (HPS UEFI Dev)" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" CC: "Yao, Jiewen" , "Zeng, Star" Thread-Topic: TPM 2.0 Manufacutre ID wrong byte order Thread-Index: AdOrz7VEcbbsZcIoT4ukA4PvAGJIIQAgZLyA Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 03:03:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiMGJmMWQyYmYtOTgyMy00NjFlLTlkNDctN2NmNzg2MDZjNzNmIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjIuNS4xOCIsIlRydXN0ZWRMYWJlbEhhc2giOiI2b2FCbDlcL3dVTkdGdmdhXC9YZXdPM1wveXI2ZDViT0thc0ZIdlJsN0NMS29QSEpcL1RWRGV2dENVbHJQZ0pcLzdXZGIifQ== dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 Subject: Re: TPM 2.0 Manufacutre ID wrong byte order X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 02:57:11 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Derek: Can you specify the "reversed" ManufactureId issue? What did you get f= rom this interface? The implementation follows Vendor ID registry spec. The vendor ID is octet = array. There is no endian issue here. We haven't seen any disorder before. From: Lin, Derek (HPS UEFI Dev) [mailto:derek.lin2@hpe.com] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 7:25 PM To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Zhang, Chao B Cc: Yao, Jiewen ; Zeng, Star Subject: TPM 2.0 Manufacutre ID wrong byte order Hi TPM expert, The line in https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/commit/73126ac2bd9804632255b2= fddd4d7633537c9620#diff-76abe1c1ebf05982ed72eaf56f489029R192 change the byt= e order of Manufacture ID in Tpm2GetCapabilityManufactureID (). I see it return "reversed" ManufactureId for two TPM vendor's module. Also, all other Capability data in Tpm2Capability.c use SwapBytes32 since T= PM is big-endian, which seems correct. Can you check this and confirm? Thanks, Derek