From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752419AbdAYV07 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 16:26:59 -0500 Received: from vps-vb.mhejs.net ([37.28.154.113]:43940 "EHLO vps-vb.mhejs.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752380AbdAYV05 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 16:26:57 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero To: Jarkko Sakkinen References: <20170116094202.bng7zfznepw7s5la@intel.com> <20170116134612.uuzbb6xi7pw7czyo@intel.com> <20170116135539.4qtrylwt3m2yfapx@intel.com> <17fd82a8-d6fd-d4ec-0965-3ebba25fca0e@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20170116163927.od5coufxvctgknot@intel.com> <8f971cbc-a4f6-22c9-fd6d-982bf4691530@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20170124120124.ycq2maroibtesjhu@intel.com> <20170125200942.d3iumrnpfautlmh7@intel.com> Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel , Peter Huewe , Marcel Selhorst , Christophe Ricard , Jason Gunthorpe From: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" Message-ID: <8e7720cf-6388-dc24-2487-64d932aec874@maciej.szmigiero.name> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 22:26:44 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170125200942.d3iumrnpfautlmh7@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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, 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, 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 commit 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM >>>>>>>>>> access") Atmel 3203 TPM on ThinkPad X61S (TPM firmware version 13.9) no >>>>>>>>>> longer works. >>>>>>>>>> The initialization proceeds fine until we get and start using chip-reported >>>>>>>>>> timeouts - and the chip reports C and D timeouts of zero. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It turns out that until commit 8e54caf407b98e ("tpm: Provide a generic >>>>>>>>>> means to override the chip returned timeouts") we had actually let default >>>>>>>>>> timeout values remain in this case, so let's bring back this behavior to >>>>>>>>>> make chips like Atmel 3203 work again. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Use a common code 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM access") >>>>>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's now applied to my master branch so if someone wants to >>>>>>>> test it, it should be fairly easy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And I decided to squash the rename commit to it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wouldn't it be better to squash the rename commit into "fix iTPM probe via >>>>>> probe_itpm() function" patch (if it isn't too late), since they touch the >>>>>> same functionality? >>>>> >>>>> It can be renamed, modified and even dropped as long as it is in my >>>>> master branch and I haven't sent pull request to James Morris. >>>> >>>> I see that "fix iTPM probe via probe_itpm() function" patch isn't present >>>> in your pull request for 4.11. >>>> >>>> What I meant in previous message was that you squashed and "rename >>>> TPM_TIS_ITPM_POSSIBLE to TPM_TIS_ITPM_WORKAROUND" patch into "use default timeout >>>> value if chip reports it as zero" patch while it was logically connected with >>>> "fix iTPM probe via probe_itpm() function" patch instead (which now isn't present >>>> at all in the tree). >>>> Sorry if it wasn't 100% clear. >>> >>> I see. >>> >>> I'll probably send later on pull request with fixes for release content >>> I can include that commit into that pull request. Does that work for >>> you? >> >> Yes, it would be fine, thanks. > > It's now applied and pushed. Almost there: it looks like the last hunk of the patch is missing from the commit. > /Jarkko Maciej From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 22:26:44 +0100 Message-ID: <8e7720cf-6388-dc24-2487-64d932aec874@maciej.szmigiero.name> References: <20170116094202.bng7zfznepw7s5la@intel.com> <20170116134612.uuzbb6xi7pw7czyo@intel.com> <20170116135539.4qtrylwt3m2yfapx@intel.com> <17fd82a8-d6fd-d4ec-0965-3ebba25fca0e@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20170116163927.od5coufxvctgknot@intel.com> <8f971cbc-a4f6-22c9-fd6d-982bf4691530@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20170124120124.ycq2maroibtesjhu@intel.com> <20170125200942.d3iumrnpfautlmh7@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170125200942.d3iumrnpfautlmh7-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tpmdd-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: Christophe Ricard , linux-kernel , tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 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, 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, 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 commit 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM >>>>>>>>>> access") Atmel 3203 TPM on ThinkPad X61S (TPM firmware version 13.9) no >>>>>>>>>> longer works. >>>>>>>>>> The initialization proceeds fine until we get and start using chip-reported >>>>>>>>>> timeouts - and the chip reports C and D timeouts of zero. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It turns out that until commit 8e54caf407b98e ("tpm: Provide a generic >>>>>>>>>> means to override the chip returned timeouts") we had actually let default >>>>>>>>>> timeout values remain in this case, so let's bring back this behavior to >>>>>>>>>> make chips like Atmel 3203 work again. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Use a common code 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM access") >>>>>>>>>> Cc: stable-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's now applied to my master branch so if someone wants to >>>>>>>> test it, it should be fairly easy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And I decided to squash the rename commit to it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wouldn't it be better to squash the rename commit into "fix iTPM probe via >>>>>> probe_itpm() function" patch (if it isn't too late), since they touch the >>>>>> same functionality? >>>>> >>>>> It can be renamed, modified and even dropped as long as it is in my >>>>> master branch and I haven't sent pull request to James Morris. >>>> >>>> I see that "fix iTPM probe via probe_itpm() function" patch isn't present >>>> in your pull request for 4.11. >>>> >>>> What I meant in previous message was that you squashed and "rename >>>> TPM_TIS_ITPM_POSSIBLE to TPM_TIS_ITPM_WORKAROUND" patch into "use default timeout >>>> value if chip reports it as zero" patch while it was logically connected with >>>> "fix iTPM probe via probe_itpm() function" patch instead (which now isn't present >>>> at all in the tree). >>>> Sorry if it wasn't 100% clear. >>> >>> I see. >>> >>> I'll probably send later on pull request with fixes for release content >>> I can include that commit into that pull request. Does that work for >>> you? >> >> Yes, it would be fine, thanks. > > It's now applied and pushed. Almost there: it looks like the last hunk of the patch is missing from the commit. > /Jarkko Maciej ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot