From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77AF736D; Sun, 14 Sep 2025 17:08:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757869733; cv=none; b=fTzQA/gf8NrdeAxFt/G/zkbl+EDh/fnb/JFfNFqOiGCKMDZ74mB+J12zUMEcSWnwvutIASDs2T90Qpz76zvOmKNOUfCVW6FC3Fqzl6dFhrG+lLdMDiSJ7kqCzmPAU7JCYXDf5kIm7qmPGQklvchIeSbIuH2kyst4mHMobJYj3cg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757869733; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fGRi7r7UGdfTvtG9WrDVbW6OFN2VqaZtKsuCj4RwQJo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rkAe17k1lIuTFZCONaGDwskwBYT/XmkrP7yKfy6s5M1xH/Cy61QvqVoAJK6iprWY8BvrP1OnXPsNzDOFt6sNkUYOlqHLXMhkeP0HfHJC4w2zkPDdPayvEHClUwPTwdSZgWb8V3VXR4mvSZnSaD+gqeAWT/q6PDp/p12fT10ydEU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=NYQ3Kc1r; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="NYQ3Kc1r" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80387C4CEF0; Sun, 14 Sep 2025 17:08:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757869731; bh=fGRi7r7UGdfTvtG9WrDVbW6OFN2VqaZtKsuCj4RwQJo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=NYQ3Kc1rdfz64Zw6jS1oG6Isaz5iT8f9/5lLGLoGRuOowmZlHExNqrqofr08pn3j2 d1NiVlgOgRb4CQWez5s+tNLIAGNBYLdbhJtGJLypmZOOp4vVIhc8V28GKBfF8MOcLQ IcyQZz/WePKMKxHVtKV7Yk3QUM4Ulph8ga9ERBZe2vuFG9BUg2npgHMGQeqAee0JNU UhKtWnXuom1t7y7IvS+B7KIyHMun17+shetZlM3f4p7UUQJs+/f+842KdeYUbXPSJQ CDq1deWz4OG9orumLhUYKkCXyHLIGw/Xgxob0RkyPX7D7JKoI2/jcVfISPZhegWhGo 1+4Xt5aesMMoQ== Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2025 20:08:48 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Alexander Wilhelm Cc: Peter Huewe , Mark Brown , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: tpm: SLM9670 does not work on T1023 Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 08:06:15PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 03:52:33PM +0200, Alexander Wilhelm wrote: > > Hello devs, > > > > I'm trying to bring up the SLM9670 TPM 2.0 device connected via SPI on a QorIQ > > T1023-based board. Pin control is fully configured through the RCW, so I haven't > > added any additional properties in the device tree. The SPI controller accesses > > the TPM using `#CS0`. > > > > However, the driver reads an incorrect vendor ID (0x1000000) and hangs during > > the startup sequence. A logic analyzer shows that the chip select line goes high > > immediately after transmitting 4 bytes, which, according to various forum > > discussions, does not comply with the TPM specification. Unfortunately, I > > haven't found a definitive solution to this issue. > > So, at least the vendor ID is bogus meaning that TPM driver is doing > right thing. > > > > > Could this be a bug in the `spi-fsl-espi` driver, or is it possibly a hardware > > limitation of the T1023? I've come across some suggestions that involve using a > > GPIO as an alternative chip select instead of the one provided by the SPI > > controller. Can anyone confirm whether this workaround is viable? I’d prefer to > > avoid a PCB redesign unless it's absolutely necessary. > > My first guess would be that the firmware inside TPM actually does throw > a broken vendor ID but it is exactly a guess :-) Ugh, no. Probably it is device tree given false data. I recall we have some ways to override device tree, so find the data sheet for the TPM and rewrite the ids I suppose. BR, Jarkko