On Fri Aug 2, 2024 at 6:19 PM EEST, Jett Rink wrote: > Could I get some feedback on this patch please? Is there something I > am not doing correctly?
Sorry, I just came from holidays. > > -Jett > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 2:24 PM Jett Rink <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Accept another DID:VID for the next generation Google TPM. This TPM > > has the same Ti50 firmware and fulfills the same interface. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jett Rink <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > Changes in v2: > > Patchset 2 applies cleanly > > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c | 11 ++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c > > b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c > > index adf22992138e..b50005ccfc5e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c > > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c > > @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ > > #define TPM_CR50_TIMEOUT_SHORT_MS 2 /* Short timeout > > during transactions */ > > #define TPM_CR50_TIMEOUT_NOIRQ_MS 20 /* Timeout for TPM > > ready without IRQ */ > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID 0x00281ae0L /* Device and > > vendor ID reg value */ > > -#define TPM_TI50_I2C_DID_VID 0x504a6666L /* Device and > > vendor ID reg value */ > > +#define TPM_TI50_DT_I2C_DID_VID 0x504a6666L /* Device > > and vendor ID reg value */ > > +#define TPM_TI50_OT_I2C_DID_VID 0x50666666L /* Device > > and vendor ID reg value */ > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_MAX_RETRIES 3 /* Max retries due > > to I2C errors */ > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_RETRY_DELAY_LO 55 /* Min usecs > > between retries on I2C */ > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_RETRY_DELAY_HI 65 /* Max usecs > > between retries on I2C */ > > @@ -741,14 +742,18 @@ static int tpm_cr50_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client > > *client) > > } > > > > vendor = le32_to_cpup((__le32 *)buf); > > - if (vendor != TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID && vendor != > > TPM_TI50_I2C_DID_VID) { > > + if (vendor != TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID && > > + vendor != TPM_TI50_DT_I2C_DID_VID && > > + vendor != TPM_TI50_OT_I2C_DID_VID) { > > dev_err(dev, "Vendor ID did not match! ID was %08x\n", > > vendor); > > tpm_cr50_release_locality(chip, true); > > return -ENODEV; > > } > > > > dev_info(dev, "%s TPM 2.0 (i2c 0x%02x irq %d id 0x%x)\n", > > - vendor == TPM_TI50_I2C_DID_VID ? "ti50" : "cr50", > > + vendor == TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID ? "cr50" : > > + vendor == TPM_TI50_DT_I2C_DID_VID ? "ti50 DT" : > > + "ti50 OT", Whenever possible ternary operator should be avoided, unless the use case super trivial: this complexity brings us zero measurable benefit and unnecessarily obfuscates code. I'd suggest to simply add a helper: /* * Maps VID to a name. */ const char *tpm_cr50_vid_to_name(u32 vendor) { switch (vendor) { case TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID: return "cr50"; case TPM_TI50_DT_I2C_DID_VID: return "ti50 DT"; case TPM_TI50_OT_I2C_DID_VID: return "ti50 OT"; default: break; } tpm_cr50_release_locality(chip, true); return NULL; } The code then transforms to: vendor = le32_to_cpup((__le32 *)buf); name = tpm2_cr50_vid_to_name(vendor); if (name == NULL) { dev_err(dev, "Vendor ID did not match! ID was %08x\n", vendor); return -ENODEV; } dev_info(dev, "%s TPM 2.0 (i2c 0x%02x irq %d id 0x%x)\n", name. client->addr, client->addr, client->irq, vendor >> 16); [and add suggested-by] > > client->addr, client->irq, vendor >> 16); > > return tpm_chip_register(chip); > > } > > -- > > 2.45.2.1089.g2a221341d9-goog > > BR, Jarkko
