On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:49:47AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 04:17:28PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 02:45:23PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > > "tpm: Enable sysfs support for TPM2 devices > > > > > > Access to chip->ops on TPM2 devices requires an explicit lock, > > > since the pointer is set to NULL in tpm_class_shutdown(). > > > Implement that lock for sysfs access functions and enable sysfs > > > support for TPM2 devices." > > > > Wait.. one of the reasons we let it go with no sysfs for so long was > > because there was not many sysfs files that were compatible with tpm2? > > > > For TPM2 we have sort of had an API break of sorts from TPM1 in a > > couple places around sysfs, and I would like to not re-introduce any > > badly designed sysfs files for TPM2.. > > > > So.. When you apply this patch, what changes actually happen in the > > sysfs directory? > > > > Jason > > Oops. I was too quick. This will cause all the TPM 1.x attributes > added also for TPM 2.0. That's not a great idea. The tpm_dev_group > should be only assigned for TPM 1.x devices. This commit should only > enable addition of sysfs attributes for TPM 2.0 devices. > After having a closer look, I agree. Sorry for my naivite. I'll split the patch into two parts, and only add (hopefully) non-controversial tpm2 attributes for now (which I think is durations and timeouts). Or, in other words, I'll split the attributes into two groups - one generic and one for tpm1. Thanks, Guenter
