On Tue Feb 20, 2024 at 11:26 PM UTC, Lino Sanfilippo wrote: > > > On 20.02.24 23:31, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > ATTENTION: This e-mail is from an external sender. Please check attachments > > and links before opening e.g. with mouseover. > > > > > > On Tue Feb 20, 2024 at 10:26 PM UTC, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >> On Tue Feb 20, 2024 at 8:54 PM UTC, Lino Sanfilippo wrote: > >>> for (i = 0; i <= MAX_LOCALITY; i++) > >>> __tpm_tis_relinquish_locality(priv, i); > >> > >> I'm pretty unfamiliar with Intel TXT so asking a dummy question: > >> if Intel TXT uses locality 2 I suppose we should not try to > >> relinquish it, or? > >> > >> AFAIK, we don't have a symbol called MAX_LOCALITY. > > > > OK it was called TPM_MAX_LOCALITY :-) I had the patch set applied > > in one branch but looked up with wrong symbol name. > > > > Sorry for the confusion. The code was just meant to sketch a solution, it was > written out of my head and I just remembered that Daniels patch set introduced > some define for the max number of the localities. I did not look up the > correct > name though.
NP BR, Jarkko
