From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Ken Goldman) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 17:32:12 -0400 Subject: Aw: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: improve tpm_tis send() performance by ignoring burstcount In-Reply-To: References: <20170807114632.1339-1-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170808191145.kggmoczd5laiccrn@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <9cb350b6-32fd-529e-eb31-6800339cddb2@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On 8/9/2017 5:00 PM, Peter Huewe wrote: > > Since we are the linux kernel, we do have to care for legacy > devices. And a system with LPC, PS2Mouse on SuperIO and a TPM are not > that uncommon. > > And heck, we even have support for 1.1b TPM devices.... Understood. However, remember that SuperIO is a 1980's device that predates the TPM. Since the TPM requires special LPC bus cycles, it's even less likely that an old chipset has an attached TPM. > Interesting - let me check with Georg tomorrow. Unfortunately I do > not have access to my tcg mails from home (since I'm not working :), > but did you _explicitly_ talk about LPC and the system? I'm sure the > TPM does not care about the waitstates... Yes, Infineon was one of the 3 TPM vendors who confirmed this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html