Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] tpm: tis-i2c: Add more compatible strings

Ninad Palsule
2024-01-16T17:44:30Z

Hello Conor,

On 1/12/24 11:24, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 10:43:08AM -0600, Ninad Palsule wrote:
>> Hello Conor,
>>
>> On 1/9/24 11:11, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 08:49:53AM -0600, Ninad Palsule wrote:
>>>> From: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>
>>>>
>>>> The NPCT75x TPM is TIS compatible. It has an I2C and SPI interface.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.nuvoton.com/products/cloud-computing/security/trusted-platform-module-tpm/
>>>>
>>>> Add a compatible string for it, and the generic compatible.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>
>>>> Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220928043957.2636877-4-joel@jms.id.au
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ninad Palsule <ninad@linux.ibm.com>
>>> I don't understand why you broke this series up and dropped patches.
>>> NAK, these compatibles are not documented.
>>>
>> The original series has three patches:
>>
>> 1) Adding compatibility string which I am adding in this series.
>>
>> 2) Adding schema for the TIS I2c devices which is already covered by Lukas's
>> patch (already merged in linux-next) https://lore.kernel.org/all/3f56f0a2bb90697a23e83583a21684b75dc7eea2.1701093036.git.lukas@wunner.de/
>>
>> 3) Removing "Infineon,slb9673" from trivial-devices.yaml which is not done
>> as it is already added in the TPM specific file. I will add it in my patch.
>> Good catch!
> Dropping this should be a standalone patch (with a Fixes tag I suppose).
>
> Looking at what got merged:
> - description: Generic TPM 2.0 chips conforming to TCG PTP interface
> items:
> - enum:
> - infineon,slb9673
> - nuvoton,npct75x
> - const: tcg,tpm-tis-i2c
>
> There's no need to add "nuvoton,npct75x" to this driver, since a
> fallback to tcg,tpm-tis-i2c is required by the binding. Adding the
> generic compatible however makes sense.
>
> If there's a good reason to add it (like existing QEMU releases that do
> not have the generic compatible, but claim to have the npct75x) then
> please note why we should make an exception in your commit message.
>
> You need not carry the NAK, the motivation behind patch is fine.

Make sense. As there is no specific code for npct75x in the driver, I
will remove it.

Thanks for the review.

Regards,

Ninad