From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761932AbdACXVM (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2017 18:21:12 -0500 Received: from quartz.orcorp.ca ([184.70.90.242]:49105 "EHLO quartz.orcorp.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761895AbdACXVI (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2017 18:21:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:20:42 -0700 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Ken Goldman Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] RFC: in-kernel resource manager Message-ID: <20170103232042.GF29656@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20170102132213.22880-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <1483374980.2458.13.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20170102193320.trawto65nkjccbao@intel.com> <1483393248.2458.32.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20170103135121.4kh3jld5gaq3ptj4@intel.com> <1483461370.2464.19.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20170103214702.GC29656@obsidianresearch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Broken-Reverse-DNS: no host name found for IP address 10.0.0.156 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 05:21:28PM -0500, Ken Goldman wrote: > On 1/3/2017 4:47 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > I think we should also consider TPM 1.2 support in all of this, it is > > still a very popular piece of hardware and it is equally able to > > support a RM. > > I suspect that TPM 2.0 and TPM 1.2 are so different that there may be > little or no code in common. Sure, but the uapi should make sense for both versions, ie, I don't want to see a tpm 2.0 specific char dev. Jason