From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Sakkinen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] TPM2.0: Added eventlog support for TPM2.0 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:12:21 -0400 Message-ID: <20160826161221.GA21990@intel.com> References: <57B36698.7040904@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160816194853.GA26364@intel.com> <20160817041502.GA8656@intel.com> <57B3FD1B.9040606@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160817080914.GA8384@intel.com> <20160818195900.GD3676@obsidianresearch.com> <20160825211304.GC8658@intel.com> <20160825212038.GB8502@obsidianresearch.com> <20160826012536.GA16846@intel.com> <20160826114316.GA18279@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160826114316.GA18279-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tpmdd-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: David Heller , tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, George Wilson List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 07:43:16AM -0400, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 09:25:36PM -0400, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 03:20:38PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:13:04PM -0400, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > Other DT platforms like ARM will use the bindings defined in > > > > > Documentation/DeviceTree. > > > > > > > > So how do I know that this the right way to specify the attibutes for a > > > > TPM device and all vendors would like to have the attributes like this? > > > > > > If you accept the patch it becomes the right way for DT. > > > > OK, thanks for educating me with this! My knowledge of DT is thin. I wasn't > > aware that things where so unstandardized. > > > > I'll take that point of view for the next version of the patch set and > > just try to make sense whether the attributes make sense to me. > > I asked my employer to order me a Raspberry PI 3 in order to have a > device that utilizes a device tree instead of ACPI (and also to have > something to test SPI and I2C connected TPMs). I'm looking forward to > use that to test this patch set. Or actually after some investigation Minnowboard is a better choice. It's quite trivial to test either ACPI or DT with it, it seems. /Jarkko ------------------------------------------------------------------------------