Re: [tpmdd-devel] tpm device not showing up in /dev anymore

[Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>]

Le 14/02/18 a 12:44, Jarkko Sakkinen a ecrit :
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 11:53:55AM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
>> I don't remember if I replied to this, re-posting to be sure:
>>
>> Le 03/01/18 a 01:33, Jerry Snitselaar a ecrit :
>>> Hi Laurent,
>>>
>>> Can you try the following debug patch (earlier idea of adding a sleep to
>>> allow
>>> tpm to complete state transition):
>>>
>>> --8<--
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> index fdde971bc810..6a9325b02059 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ static void release_locality(struct tpm_chip *chip,
>>> int l)
>>>      struct tpm_tis_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
>>>
>>>      tpm_tis_write8(priv, TPM_ACCESS(l), TPM_ACCESS_ACTIVE_LOCALITY);
>>> +    tpm_msleep(200);
>>> }
>>>
>>> static int request_locality(struct tpm_chip *chip, int l)
>> I tried the patch and this is working.
>>
>> Would that be a viable solution?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Laurent Bigonville
> According to the PC client specification in the section 5.5.2.3:
>
> "For commands indicated as short or medium duration (i.e., those that do
> not cause key  generation), the TPM SHALL respond to an abort within
> TIMEOUT_A. For commands indicated as lon g duration or those that cause
> key generation, the TPM SHALL respond to a request to abort the command
> within TIMEOUT B"
>
> The section 5.5.2.4 describing the access register does not give much
> more light to this i.e. what the expected duration maximum is when there
> is no command executing.
The duration that that was in your patch seems to work, cannot this be 
implemented?

I'm quite surprised I'm the only one impacted by this...