From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752716AbdAYW71 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:59:27 -0500 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:43213 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752382AbdAYW70 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:59:26 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,286,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="1098959204" Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:58:57 +0200 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel , Peter Huewe , Marcel Selhorst , Christophe Ricard , Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero Message-ID: <20170125225857.b5k5ziw67okx77pc@intel.com> References: <20170116094202.bng7zfznepw7s5la@intel.com> <20170116134612.uuzbb6xi7pw7czyo@intel.com> <20170116135539.4qtrylwt3m2yfapx@intel.com> <17fd82a8-d6fd-d4ec-0965-3ebba25fca0e@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20170116163927.od5coufxvctgknot@intel.com> <8f971cbc-a4f6-22c9-fd6d-982bf4691530@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20170124120124.ycq2maroibtesjhu@intel.com> <20170125200942.d3iumrnpfautlmh7@intel.com> <8e7720cf-6388-dc24-2487-64d932aec874@maciej.szmigiero.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8e7720cf-6388-dc24-2487-64d932aec874@maciej.szmigiero.name> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-08-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:26:44PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > On 25.01.2017 21:09, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 02:42:29PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > >> On 24.01.2017 13:01, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 06:23:55PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > >>>> On 16.01.2017 17:39, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:58:26PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > >>>>>> On 16.01.2017 14:55, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:46:12PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:42:02AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:37:00PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Since commit 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM > >>>>>>>>>> access") Atmel 3203 TPM on ThinkPad X61S (TPM firmware version 13.9) no > >>>>>>>>>> longer works. > >>>>>>>>>> The initialization proceeds fine until we get and start using chip-reported > >>>>>>>>>> timeouts - and the chip reports C and D timeouts of zero. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> It turns out that until commit 8e54caf407b98e ("tpm: Provide a generic > >>>>>>>>>> means to override the chip returned timeouts") we had actually let default > >>>>>>>>>> timeout values remain in this case, so let's bring back this behavior to > >>>>>>>>>> make chips like Atmel 3203 work again. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Use a common code that was introduced by that commit so a warning is > >>>>>>>>>> printed in this case and /sys/class/tpm/tpm*/timeouts correctly says the > >>>>>>>>>> timeouts aren't chip-original. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM access") > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It's now applied to my master branch so if someone wants to > >>>>>>>> test it, it should be fairly easy. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> And I decided to squash the rename commit to it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Wouldn't it be better to squash the rename commit into "fix iTPM probe via > >>>>>> probe_itpm() function" patch (if it isn't too late), since they touch the > >>>>>> same functionality? > >>>>> > >>>>> It can be renamed, modified and even dropped as long as it is in my > >>>>> master branch and I haven't sent pull request to James Morris. > >>>> > >>>> I see that "fix iTPM probe via probe_itpm() function" patch isn't present > >>>> in your pull request for 4.11. > >>>> > >>>> What I meant in previous message was that you squashed and "rename > >>>> TPM_TIS_ITPM_POSSIBLE to TPM_TIS_ITPM_WORKAROUND" patch into "use default timeout > >>>> value if chip reports it as zero" patch while it was logically connected with > >>>> "fix iTPM probe via probe_itpm() function" patch instead (which now isn't present > >>>> at all in the tree). > >>>> Sorry if it wasn't 100% clear. > >>> > >>> I see. > >>> > >>> I'll probably send later on pull request with fixes for release content > >>> I can include that commit into that pull request. Does that work for > >>> you? > >> > >> Yes, it would be fine, thanks. > > > > It's now applied and pushed. > > Almost there: it looks like the last hunk of the patch is missing from > the commit. > > > /Jarkko > > Maciej Sorrya about that (too much multitasking lately). I had to do a bit of manual work to get it there. Now it should be good. /Jarkko