On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 04:12:08PM +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> Encapsulate the start method parsing in a single function
> and add needed debug printouts.
> It eliminates small issue with useless double checking for
> ACPI_TPM2_MEMORY_MAPPED.

Start method is trival to check from TPM2 dump. I'm not sure which
problem is this commit trying to solve.

/Jarkko

> Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler <tomas.wink...@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c | 65 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c
> index aa0ef742ac03..aeec313384d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c
> @@ -381,6 +381,52 @@ out:
>       return ret;
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * crb_start_method - parse starting method
> + *
> + * @device: acpi device
> + * @sm: starting method
> + *
> + * Return 0 if supported starting method was not found
> + *    CRB_FL_CRB_START or CRB_FL_ACPI_START otherwise
> + */
> +static unsigned int crb_start_method(struct acpi_device *device, u32 sm)
> +{
> +     struct device *dev = &device->dev;
> +     u32 flags;
> +
> +     switch (sm) {
> +     /* Should the FIFO driver handle this? */
> +     case ACPI_TPM2_MEMORY_MAPPED:
> +             dev_dbg(dev, "starting method[%d]: MM\n", sm);
> +             return 0;
> +     case ACPI_TPM2_COMMAND_BUFFER:
> +             flags = CRB_FL_CRB_START;
> +             dev_dbg(dev, "starting method[%d]: CB\n", sm);
> +             break;
> +     case ACPI_TPM2_START_METHOD:
> +             flags = CRB_FL_ACPI_START;
> +             dev_dbg(dev, "starting method[%d]: SM\n", sm);
> +             break;
> +     case ACPI_TPM2_COMMAND_BUFFER_WITH_START_METHOD:
> +             flags = CRB_FL_ACPI_START;
> +             dev_dbg(dev, "starting method[%d]: CB w/ SM\n",
> +                     sm);
> +             break;
> +     default:
> +             return 0;
> +     }
> +
> +     /* The reason for the extra quirk is that the PTT in 4th Gen Core CPUs
> +      * report only ACPI start but in practice seems to require both
> +      * ACPI start and CRB start.
> +      */
> +     if (!strcmp(acpi_device_hid(device), "MSFT0101"))
> +             flags |= CRB_FL_CRB_START;
> +
> +     return flags;
> +}
> +
>  static int crb_acpi_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>  {
>       struct acpi_table_tpm2 *buf;
> @@ -388,7 +434,7 @@ static int crb_acpi_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>       struct tpm_chip *chip;
>       struct device *dev = &device->dev;
>       acpi_status status;
> -     u32 sm;
> +     unsigned int sm;
>       int rc;
>  
>       status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_TPM2, 1,
> @@ -398,26 +444,15 @@ static int crb_acpi_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>               return -EINVAL;
>       }
>  
> -     /* Should the FIFO driver handle this? */
> -     sm = buf->start_method;
> -     if (sm == ACPI_TPM2_MEMORY_MAPPED)
> +     sm = crb_start_method(device, buf->start_method);
> +     if (!sm)
>               return -ENODEV;
>  
>       priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct crb_priv), GFP_KERNEL);
>       if (!priv)
>               return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -     /* The reason for the extra quirk is that the PTT in 4th Gen Core CPUs
> -      * report only ACPI start but in practice seems to require both
> -      * ACPI start and CRB start.
> -      */
> -     if (sm == ACPI_TPM2_COMMAND_BUFFER || sm == ACPI_TPM2_MEMORY_MAPPED ||
> -         !strcmp(acpi_device_hid(device), "MSFT0101"))
> -             priv->flags |= CRB_FL_CRB_START;
> -
> -     if (sm == ACPI_TPM2_START_METHOD ||
> -         sm == ACPI_TPM2_COMMAND_BUFFER_WITH_START_METHOD)
> -             priv->flags |= CRB_FL_ACPI_START;
> +     priv->flags = sm;
>  
>       rc = crb_map_io(device, priv, buf);
>       if (rc)
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
tpmdd-devel mailing list
tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel

Reply via email to