Re: [tpmdd-devel] [backport v4.9] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero

Hi Jarkko, On 15.04.2017 17:26, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > From: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <m...@maciej.szmigiero.name> > > Since commit 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for > TPM access") Atmel 3203 TPM on ThinkPad X61S (TPM fi

Re: [tpmdd-devel] Regression between Linux 3.16 and 4.8/4.9 on Lenovo X60 with coreboot

On 04/06/17 08:18, Paul Menzel wrote: > Dear Maciej, > > On 2017-04-05 13:03, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > >>> tpm tpm0: Unable to read burstcount >>> tpm tpm0: tpm_transmit: tpm_send: error -16 >>> tpm_tis tpm_tis: Could not get TPM timeouts and duratio

Re: [tpmdd-devel] Regression between Linux 3.16 and 4.8/4.9 on Lenovo X60 with coreboot

Hi Paul, > tpm tpm0: Unable to read burstcount > tpm tpm0: tpm_transmit: tpm_send: error -16 > tpm_tis tpm_tis: Could not get TPM timeouts and durations This looks like a regression I had on ThinkPad X61S. You can try with a patch from the following commit which fixed it for me:

Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero

On 25.01.2017 23:58, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:26:44PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >> On 25.01.2017 21:09, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 02:42:29PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >>>> On 24.01.2017 13:01, Jarkk

Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero

On 24.01.2017 13:01, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 06:23:55PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >> On 16.01.2017 17:39, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:58:26PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >>>> On 16.01.2017 14:55, Jarkk

Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero

On 16.01.2017 14:55, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:46:12PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:42:02AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:37:00PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >>>> Since

[tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero

that was introduced by that commit so a warning is printed in this case and /sys/class/tpm/tpm*/timeouts correctly says the timeouts aren't chip-original. Signed-off-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <m...@maciej.szmigiero.name> Fixes: 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM acce

[tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm_tis: override reported C and D timeouts for Atmel 3203

D timeouts of zero. Since these are clearly not long enough let's add an override for them to TPM TIS default values, just as we do for Atmel 3204. A and B timeouts are set to the same values as the chip normally reports. Signed-off-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <m...@maciej.szmigiero.name> Fix

Re: [tpmdd-devel] [RESEND][RFC] tpm_tis: broken on TPMs with a static burst count

Hi Jarkko, On 09.01.2017 23:09, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 06:47:52PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >> (Resending as no reply received, this time with CCs to TPM maintainers and >> author of the original commit). >> >> Hi all, >>

[tpmdd-devel] tpm_tis: broken on TPMs with a static burst count

Hi all, Commit 1107d065fdf1 (tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM access) broke TPM support on ThinkPad X61S (and likely also on other machines which use TPMs with a static burst count). It looks like tpm_tis code before this commit had spun on TPM_STS_DATA_AVAIL | TPM_STS_VALID status

[tpmdd-devel] [RESEND][RFC] tpm_tis: broken on TPMs with a static burst count

(Resending as no reply received, this time with CCs to TPM maintainers and author of the original commit). Hi all, Commit 1107d065fdf1 (tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM access) broke TPM support on ThinkPad X61S (and likely also on other machines which use TPMs with a static burst