Skip to content

Update SWTPM to work with latest evetpm changes#5591

Draft
shjala wants to merge 3 commits intolf-edge:masterfrom
shjala:swtpm.fix.5398
Draft

Update SWTPM to work with latest evetpm changes#5591
shjala wants to merge 3 commits intolf-edge:masterfrom
shjala:swtpm.fix.5398

Conversation

@shjala
Copy link
Member

@shjala shjala commented Feb 3, 2026

Description

  • Bump up packages to include latest pillar changes
  • Update SWTPM encryption key retrieval to use PCR selection from policy.

PR dependencies

None

How to test and validate this PR

On a device with TPM (or emulated), deploy a VM, vTPM should work as expected and VM should show TPM available.

Changelog notes

N/A

PR Backports

Possibly needs backporting, based on #5398 backports.

Checklist

  • I've provided a proper description
  • I've added the proper documentation
  • I've tested my PR on amd64 device
  • I've tested my PR on arm64 device
  • I've written the test verification instructions
  • I've set the proper labels to this PR

For backport PRs (remove it if it's not a backport):

  • I've added a reference link to the original PR
  • PR's title follows the template

And the last but not least:

  • I've checked the boxes above, or I've provided a good reason why I didn't
    check them.

Please, check the boxes above after submitting the PR in interactive mode.

@shjala shjala requested a review from eriknordmark as a code owner February 3, 2026 20:06
@shjala shjala marked this pull request as draft February 3, 2026 20:06
Bump up packages to include latest pillar changes

Signed-off-by: Shahriyar Jalayeri <shahriyar@posteo.de>
Update encryption key retrieval to use PCR selection from policy.

Signed-off-by: Shahriyar Jalayeri <shahriyar@posteo.de>
@shjala
Copy link
Member Author

shjala commented Feb 4, 2026

@christoph-zededa do we have a script to fix the Dockerfile hash inconsistency?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 29.49%. Comparing base (2281599) to head (185693f).
⚠️ Report is 266 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5591      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   19.52%   29.49%   +9.96%     
==========================================
  Files          19       18       -1     
  Lines        3021     2417     -604     
==========================================
+ Hits          590      713     +123     
+ Misses       2310     1552     -758     
- Partials      121      152      +31     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Update debug container to use latest hash.

Signed-off-by: Shahriyar Jalayeri <shahriyar@posteo.de>
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from rouming February 6, 2026 15:01
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