On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:57:21AM -0400, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
> From: thiruan <thiruan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> add shutdown call back to close existing session with fTPM TA
> to support kexec scenario.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thirupathaiah Annapureddy <thiruan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Use the correct tag in the short summary (tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee).
> ---
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.c
> index 6640a14dbe48..c245be6f4015 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.c
> @@ -328,6 +328,27 @@ static int ftpm_tee_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * ftpm_tee_shutdown - shutdown the TPM device
> + * @pdev: the platform_device description.
> + *
> + * Return:
> + * none.
Do not document return values for a void function. The last three lines
do not serve any purpose.
> + */
> +static void ftpm_tee_shutdown(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct ftpm_tee_private *pvt_data = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> +
> + /* Free the shared memory pool */
> + tee_shm_free(pvt_data->shm);
Is it unexpected that calling tee_shm_free() free's a shared memory
pool? A comment here implies exactly that.
> + /* close the existing session with fTPM TA*/
> + tee_client_close_session(pvt_data->ctx, pvt_data->session);
Ditto.
> +
> + /* close the context with TEE driver */
> + tee_client_close_context(pvt_data->ctx);
Ditto.
> +}
> +
> static const struct of_device_id of_ftpm_tee_ids[] = {
> { .compatible = "microsoft,ftpm" },
> { }
> @@ -341,6 +362,7 @@ static struct platform_driver ftpm_tee_driver = {
> },
> .probe = ftpm_tee_probe,
> .remove = ftpm_tee_remove,
> + .shutdown = ftpm_tee_shutdown,
> };
>
> module_platform_driver(ftpm_tee_driver);
> --
> 2.23.0
>
/Jarkko
