From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm, tpm_crb: remove redundant CRB_FL_CRB_START flag Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 14:24:21 -0600 Message-ID: <20161020202421.GA13459@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20161017204224.27163-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20161017225113.qnghq5vroxlmsurc@intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B542FF8FC@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20161019160928.n5fswy25t2ppdh73@intel.com> <20161020135906.ah4rjympz3wq6g3t@intel.com> <20161020140011.s5mu3atjjwnwqda4@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: <20161020140011.s5mu3atjjwnwqda4-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: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: "tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org" , open list List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 05:00:11PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > I have a 4th Gen Core NUC where I experienced this issue. It reported > > > requiring only ACPI start but actually required ACPI + CRB start. The > > > comment could have been better. Shouldn't bios work arounds be keyed on something? What happens if a system rolls around that cannot do ACPI + CRB start? How does this system work in windows? Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot