From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
Andrey Pronin <apronin@chromium.org>,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Add explicit chip->ops locking for sysfs attributes.
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:28:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171121182858.GA4895@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171120234947.zd5bekvqg5z5rp3i@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:49:47AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 04:17:28PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 02:45:23PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >
> > > "tpm: Enable sysfs support for TPM2 devices
> > >
> > > Access to chip->ops on TPM2 devices requires an explicit lock,
> > > since the pointer is set to NULL in tpm_class_shutdown().
> > > Implement that lock for sysfs access functions and enable sysfs
> > > support for TPM2 devices."
> >
> > Wait.. one of the reasons we let it go with no sysfs for so long was
> > because there was not many sysfs files that were compatible with tpm2?
> >
> > For TPM2 we have sort of had an API break of sorts from TPM1 in a
> > couple places around sysfs, and I would like to not re-introduce any
> > badly designed sysfs files for TPM2..
> >
> > So.. When you apply this patch, what changes actually happen in the
> > sysfs directory?
> >
> > Jason
>
> Oops. I was too quick. This will cause all the TPM 1.x attributes
> added also for TPM 2.0. That's not a great idea. The tpm_dev_group
> should be only assigned for TPM 1.x devices. This commit should only
> enable addition of sysfs attributes for TPM 2.0 devices.
>
After having a closer look, I agree. Sorry for my naivite.
I'll split the patch into two parts, and only add (hopefully)
non-controversial tpm2 attributes for now (which I think is durations
and timeouts). Or, in other words, I'll split the attributes into
two groups - one generic and one for tpm1.
Thanks,
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-21 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-16 21:25 [PATCH] tpm: Add explicit chip->ops locking for sysfs attributes Guenter Roeck
2017-11-20 22:13 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-20 22:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-11-20 23:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-11-20 23:49 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-21 18:28 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2017-11-21 18:58 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 13:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-27 16:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-11-28 20:24 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-11-20 23:45 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171121182858.GA4895@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=apronin@chromium.org \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).