From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: "Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@intel.com>,
"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
"open list:ACPI COMPONENT AR..." <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:ACPI COMPONENT AR..." <devel@acpica.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: update struct acpi_table_tpm2
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 19:33:32 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150609163332.GA18210@jsakkine-mobl1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37D2F2CA6@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 04:16:14PM +0000, Moore, Robert wrote:
> Looking at the TCG ACPI Specification today, it looks like there are
> major changes to the TCPA table. There is a whole bunch of new stuff
> after the Log Area Start Address.
>
> Perhaps I missed or didn't get part of your proposed change.
I was looking only at the client TCPA table so it was my bad. The client
table has only the change that I did in the patch. I'm myself focused
towards TPM 2.0 work.
If you look at very old specification version:
https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/files/temp/6453AF78-1D09-3519-AD74028427486A3B/Server%20TCG_ACPIGeneralSpecification.pdf
You see that there is also a server TCPA with a lot more fields that we
have. If the need hasn't rised for those fields since 2005, I would not
add them unless there is a real use case.
If you seriously want those fields to be part of the patch, I can do a
struct for server TCPA but I don't think there will be value for it.
/Jarkko
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jarkko Sakkinen [mailto:jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 8:19 AM
> > To: Moore, Robert
> > Cc: Zheng, Lv; Wysocki, Rafael J; Len Brown; open list:ACPI COMPONENT
> > AR...; open list:ACPI COMPONENT AR...; open list
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: update struct acpi_table_tpm2
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 02:21:12PM +0000, Moore, Robert wrote:
> > > ACPICA usually defines any "related" data structures, just for user
> > > convenience.
> >
> > If you want to keep it, it's fine for me but we still probably use the
> > internal structure for it in tpm_crb driver (as tpm_tis uses internal
> > structure for CRB).
> >
> > Do other updates look fine? I'm looking into migrating to tpm_crb driver
> > to use actbl3.h.
> >
> > /Jarkko
> >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Jarkko Sakkinen [mailto:jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 2:18 AM
> > > > To: Moore, Robert
> > > > Cc: Zheng, Lv; Wysocki, Rafael J; Len Brown; open list:ACPI
> > > > COMPONENT AR...; open list:ACPI COMPONENT AR...; open list
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: update struct acpi_table_tpm2
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 08:52:02PM +0000, Moore, Robert wrote:
> > > > > It looks like there is a change to the TCPA table also.
> > > >
> > > > Right. I'll update that too.
> > > >
> > > > I strongly think that the struct acpi_tpm2_control should not be in
> > > > actbl3.h. It is not defined in the TCG ACPI specification. It is
> > > > defined in
> > > >
> > > > http://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/resources/pc_client_platform_tp
> > > > m_prof
> > > > ile_ptp_specification
> > > >
> > > > FIFO control structures are internal for to the TPM subsystem and so
> > > > should be CRB control structures (and we have already inside
> > tpm_crb.c).
> > > >
> > > > The structure ended up there probably because it was combined with
> > > > the
> > > > TPM2 table in that Microsoft specification.
> > > >
> > > > /Jarkko
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-09 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-08 13:38 [PATCH] acpi: update struct acpi_table_tpm2 Jarkko Sakkinen
2015-06-08 20:52 ` Moore, Robert
2015-06-09 9:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2015-06-09 14:21 ` Moore, Robert
2015-06-09 15:19 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2015-06-09 15:42 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2015-06-09 16:12 ` Moore, Robert
2015-06-09 16:13 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2015-06-09 16:16 ` Moore, Robert
2015-06-09 16:33 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150609163332.GA18210@jsakkine-mobl1 \
--to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=devel@acpica.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lv.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).