On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 09:49:33PM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On 7 November 2017 at 21:34, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:50:44AM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote: > > > >> I am assuming you are talking about the following patches - using > >> struct tpm_chip instead of chip number and this patch. > > > > yes > > > >> I won't be able to test if struct tpm_chip usage as I don't have > >> multiple tpm hw in one machine. In case of tpm rng changes I can test > >> only the lifecycle of tpm rng device. Is that enough? I feel my test > >> will be limited. Please provide your thoughts on this. > > > > That is certainly better than no testing. > > The struct tpm_chip patch partially applied on linux next. I had to > manually change the code. In qemu tpm rng device did not show up on > loading tpm module. My laptop has tpm hw but Linux next did not work > properly in that. All my console were getting spammed with some USB > log message and I could not do anything. X did not start either. I > could not debug the issue as the logs were printing infinitely. Will > get little more time this weekend. Will do a proper test and provide > you the result. Test against 4.15-rc, here are the two patches https://github.com/jgunthorpe/linux/tree/tpm Pull from here and merge the latest rc and you will probably have a bootable system. Jason
