On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:31:44AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2021-01-13 at 08:48 +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 05:59:58PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > Create sysfs per hash groups with 24 PCR files in them one group, > > > named pcr-<hash>, for each agile hash of the TPM. The files are > > > plugged in to a PCR read function which is TPM version agnostic, so > > > this works also for TPM 1.2 but the hash is only sha1 in that case. > > > > > > Note: the macros used to create the hashes emit spurious checkpatch > > > warnings. Do not try to "fix" them as checkpatch recommends, > > > otherwise > > > they'll break. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley < > > > James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Tested-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > v2: fix TPM 1.2 legacy links failure > > > v3: fix warn on and add note to tpm_algorithms > > > v4: reword commit and add tested-by > > > v5: algorithm spelling fix WARN->dev_err > > > --- > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c | 179 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > include/linux/tpm.h | 9 +- > > > 2 files changed, 187 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > You add new sysfs files, but do not add Documentation/ABI/ entries > > showing how they are used and what they contain :( > > > > Please do that for the next version of this patch. > > It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem since I've no idea when this > will go upstream and the entries require that information making the > ABI more of a post accept type thing. I can make a guess about the > values if Jarkko is going to but this in for the next merge window. > > James I agree with the ABI side, so you can safely include this to the patch set. And yes, this looks like something I can include to the 5.12 PR. Did you address Greg's remarks about warns? Other than that, please send a version with ABI entries so that we can move forward with this. /Jarkko
