On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 02:49:12PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:26:59AM -0700, Josh Zimmerman wrote: > > If a TPM2 loses power without a TPM2_Shutdown command being issued, it > > may lose some state that has yet to be persisted to NVRam, and will > > increment the DA counter (meaning that after too many disorderly > > reboots, the TPM will lock the user out). > > > > This is a variant of https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9516631/. > > This has all the same problems of that patch, just now adds the code > to tis driver as well.. > > There is not much reason to accept this and reject the above patch. > > > It differs in that: > > * It only changes behavior on TPM2 devices, to avoid invoking the > > unbounded-waiting sysfs codepath that was discussed on that patch. > > Hum. If that is a sensible work around for now then lets just do that > at the core code level please. > > If you do this, then tpm_sysfs_add_device really needs a comment > warning that tpm2 can not have sysfs until the problems are fixed with > shutdown. > > > * It modifies tpm_tis rather than tpm_i2c_infineon, so that it can > > change behavior for all TPM2 devices. > > There are many drivers that support TPM2 beyond tpm_tis, this just > fixes a few tis drivers, re-enforcing my point in the original patch > that this stuff has no buisness being in the low level drivers and > should be in core code. > > Jason
Let me note that this does not even cover all of the tpm_tis. /Jarkko ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
