Thanks for your feedback, I have sent an updated patch to the list,
(as far as I could tell, the convention is to prefix with: [PATCH
v2]).
Regards
Jes
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 9:53 AM Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2022-04-14 at 17:06 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Dear Jarkko,
> >
> >
> > Am 14.04.22 um 14:08 schrieb Jarkko Sakkinen:
> > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 12:21:44PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> >
> > > > Thank you for your patch.
> > > >
> > > > Am 05.04.22 um 19:37 schrieb Jes B. Klinke:
> > > > > Accept one additional numerical value of DID:VID for next generation
> > > > > Google TPM, to be used in future Chromebooks.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe extend:
> > > >
> > > > … Google TPM with new firmware …
> > > >
> > > > The TPM with the new firmware has the code name TI50, and going to use the
> > > > same interfaces.
> > > >
> > > > > This patch touches more lines than may seem necessary, as a result of
> > > > > the need to move the error case to sit after the two recognized cases.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jes B. Klinke <jbk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
> > > > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c
> > > > > index f6c0affbb4567..bf54ebd6724b0 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_i2c_cr50.c
> > > > > @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
> > > > > #define TPM_CR50_TIMEOUT_SHORT_MS 2 /* Short timeout during transactions */
> > > > > #define TPM_CR50_TIMEOUT_NOIRQ_MS 20 /* Timeout for TPM ready without IRQ */
> > > > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID 0x00281ae0L /* Device and vendor ID reg value */
> > > > > +#define TPM_TI50_I2C_DID_VID 0x504a6666L /* Device and vendor ID reg value */
> > > > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_MAX_RETRIES 3 /* Max retries due to I2C errors */
> > > > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_RETRY_DELAY_LO 55 /* Min usecs between retries on I2C */
> > > > > #define TPM_CR50_I2C_RETRY_DELAY_HI 65 /* Max usecs between retries on I2C */
> > > > > @@ -742,16 +743,20 @@ static int tpm_cr50_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> > > > > }
> > > > > vendor = le32_to_cpup((__le32 *)buf);
> > > > > - if (vendor != TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID) {
> > > > > - dev_err(dev, "Vendor ID did not match! ID was %08x\n", vendor);
> > > > > - tpm_cr50_release_locality(chip, true);
> > > > > - return -ENODEV;
> > > > > + if (vendor == TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID) {
> > > > > + dev_info(dev, "cr50 TPM 2.0 (i2c 0x%02x irq %d id 0x%x)\n",
> > > > > + client->addr, client->irq, vendor >> 16);
> > > > > + return tpm_chip_register(chip);
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + if (vendor == TPM_TI50_I2C_DID_VID) {
> > > > > + dev_info(dev, "ti50 TPM 2.0 (i2c 0x%02x irq %d id 0x%x)\n",
> > > > > + client->addr, client->irq, vendor >> 16);
> > > > > + return tpm_chip_register(chip);
> > > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Both branches are quite similar. Can a ternary operator be used?
> > > >
> > > > dev_info(dev, "%s TPM 2.0 (i2c 0x%02x irq %d id 0x%x)\n",
> > > > (vendor == TPM_CR50_I2C_DID_VID) ? "cr50" : "ti50", client->addr,
> > > > client->irq, vendor >> 16);
> > > > return tpm_chip_register(chip);
> > > >
> > > > and the original flow be left? (A separate variable can also be added.)
> > > >
> > > > > - dev_info(dev, "cr50 TPM 2.0 (i2c 0x%02x irq %d id 0x%x)\n",
> > > > > - client->addr, client->irq, vendor >> 16);
> > > > > -
> > > > > - return tpm_chip_register(chip);
> > > > > + dev_err(dev, "Vendor ID did not match! ID was %08x\n", vendor);
> > > > > + tpm_cr50_release_locality(chip, true);
> > > > > + return -ENODEV;
> > > > > }
> > > > > /**
> >
> > > OK, these are legit suggestions. Paul, can you do these changes and add my
> > > reviewed-by for the +1 version?
> >
> > I guess you mean Jes?
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
>
> Yeah, I meant Jes :-)
>
> /Jarkko
