> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 06:34:37PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 06:36:04PM +0900, Seunghun Han wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 01:36:30AM +0900, Seunghun Han wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I got your point. Is there any problem if some regions which don't > > > > > > need to be handled in NVS area are saved and restored? If there is a > > > > > > problem, how about adding code for ignoring the regions in NVS area to > > > > > > the nvs.c file like Jarkko said? If we add the code, we can save and > > > > > > restore NVS area without driver's interaction. > > > > > > > > > > The only thing that knows which regions should be skipped by the NVS > > > > > driver is the hardware specific driver, so the TPM driver needs to ask > > > > > the NVS driver to ignore that region and grant control to the TPM > > > > > driver. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > Thank you, Matthew and Jarkko. > > > > It seems that the TPM driver needs to handle the specific case that > > > > TPM regions are in the NVS. I would make a patch that removes TPM > > > > regions from the ACPI NVS by requesting to the NVS driver soon. > > > > > > > > Jarkko, > > > > I would like to get some advice on it. What do you think about > > > > removing TPM regions from the ACPI NVS in TPM CRB driver? If you don't > > > > mind, I would make the patch about it. > > > > > > I'm not sure if ignoring is right call. Then the hibernation behaviour > > > for TPM regions would break. > > > > > > Thus, should be "ask access" rather than "grant control". > > I agree with your idea. It seems to make trouble. So, I would like to > do like your idea below. > > > Or "reserve access" as NVS driver does not have intelligence to do any > > policy based decision here. > > > > A function that gets region and then checks if NVS driver has matching > > one and returns true/false based on that should be good enough. Then > > you raw ioremap() in the TPM driver. > > > > /Jarkko > > This solution is great and clear to me. I will make a new patch on > your advice and test it in my machine. After that, I will send it > again soon. > I really appreciate it. > > Seunghun I have made and sent patches on your advice. The patch links are below and please review them. [PATCH 0/2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/30/372 [PATCH 1/2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/30/373 [PATCH 2/2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/30/374 Thank you again for your sincere advice. Seunghun
