From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751693AbcGOQ5F (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:57:05 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.220.50]:35979 "EHLO mail-pa0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750851AbcGOQ5D (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:57:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:56:58 -0700 From: Andrey Pronin To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen , Peter Huewe , Marcel Selhorst , tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, groeck@chromium.org, smbarber@chromium.org, dianders@chromium.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tpm: add sysfs attributes for tpm2 Message-ID: <20160715165658.GA109276@apronin> References: <1468547496-16215-1-git-send-email-apronin@chromium.org> <1468547496-16215-2-git-send-email-apronin@chromium.org> <20160715032145.GE9347@obsidianresearch.com> <20160715033201.GA27104@apronin> <20160715033439.GI9347@obsidianresearch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160715033439.GI9347@obsidianresearch.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 09:34:39PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 08:32:01PM -0700, Andrey Pronin wrote: > > > tpm2 shares some of the attributes with tpm1 (e.g. timeouts). Do I still > > just add those separately for tpm2 to groups[1] and keep groups[0] empty? Just realized that if we keep tpm_add_legacy_sysfs() intact, it doesn't create symlinks for tpm2 case for any of the groups, including groups[0]. So, in tpm_sysfs_add_device() can just do smth like: if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) chip->groups[chip->groups_cnt++] = &tpm2_dev_group; else chip->groups[chip->groups_cnt++] = &tpm_dev_group; Is that acceptable? Will submit the next version along those lines. > > I think so. Since the file never exists for tpm2, nothing coded for > tpm2 will ever look in the old location. > There can be a common code working with tpm1.2 that will just continue working with tpm2 if the common attributes are in the same place. So, some part of code can be re-used as is, but I agree that there are not too many common attributes. Will drop for now. Can be addressed later if the clear need arises.