>-----Original Message----- >From: linux-integrity-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-integrity- >owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jarkko Sakkinen >Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 1:39 PM >To: Shaikh, Azhar <azhar.shaikh@xxxxxxxxx> >Cc: linux-integrity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Sakkinen, Jarkko ><jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxx> >Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] Fix corner cases with disabling CLKRUN in >tpm_tis > >On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 01:32:06PM -0800, Azhar Shaikh wrote: >> Changes from v1: >> - Patch 1: "tpm: Keep CLKRUN enabled throughout the duration of >transmit_cmd()" >> - Add NULL checks before calling clk_toggle callback >> - Use IS_ENABLED instead of ifdef in tpm_tis_clkrun_toggle() >> - Do not call tpm_platform_begin_xfer() and tpm_platform_end_xfer() >> from tpm_tis_clkrun_toggle(). Make them static again. >> >> - Patch 2: "tpm_tis: Move ilb_base_addr to tpm_tis_tcg_phy" >> - This is a new patch in this series as per suggestion from Jason. >> - Is the current implementation ok or I should move the code in >tpm_tis_pnp_remove() >> and tpm_tis_plat_remove() inside tpm_tis_remove(). That way all the >unmapping >> can be done in one place, instead of 3 different places now. Also the >unmapping >> in tpm_tis_init() can be moved to tpm_tis_remove(), since in case of error >> tpm_tis_core_init() calls tpm_tis_remove(). Kindly suggest. >> >> >> Azhar Shaikh (2): >> tpm: Keep CLKRUN enabled throughout the duration of transmit_cmd() >> tpm_tis: Move ilb_base_addr to tpm_tis_tcg_phy >> >> drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 6 +++ >> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- >------ >> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 21 ++++++++ >> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.h | 1 + >> include/linux/tpm.h | 1 + >> 5 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 1.9.1 >> > >Please include my email (@linux.intel.com) to the TO-field for all TPM >patches (and the cover letter). > Sorry about this. Going forward will include @linux.intel.com and other TPM maintainers to the TO-field. >I will eventually catch these as I go through the ML but sometimes there >is more latency to do that when I have a busy period. In a less busy >period there is of course less latency. > >As this is a shared list with IMA and EVM I have to check every message >whether it is a TPM patch. Thus, in a shared list including maintainers >is even more important. You can find maintainers for every subsystem >from MAINTAINERS file in the root of the Linux GIT tree. > >Right now I have a very busy period as I'm upstream the SGX driver. That >is why it took a week to even spot this (just did). > >I'll try to find time this week to properly review your changes but >cannot promise it will be tomorrow because, well, I just saw the patch >set. > Sure, I understand. Thank you! >With a quick oversight I do not see anything that would shock me but I >still have to look into it with time and care. > >/Jarkko
