On 13/04/2024 23:47, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Sat Apr 13, 2024 at 10:15 AM EEST, M. Haener wrote: >> From: Michael Haener <michael.haener@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Add the ST chip st33ktpm2xi2c to the supported compatible strings of the >> TPM TIS I2C schema. The Chip is compliant with the TCG PC Client TPM >> Profile specification. >> >> For reference, a datasheet is available at: >> https://www.st.com/resource/en/data_brief/st33ktpm2xi2c.pdf >> >> Reviewed-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Haener <michael.haener@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tpm/tcg,tpm-tis-i2c.yaml | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tpm/tcg,tpm-tis-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tpm/tcg,tpm-tis-i2c.yaml >> index 3ab4434b7352..af7720dc4a12 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tpm/tcg,tpm-tis-i2c.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tpm/tcg,tpm-tis-i2c.yaml >> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ properties: >> - enum: >> - infineon,slb9673 >> - nuvoton,npct75x >> + - st,st33ktpm2xi2c >> - const: tcg,tpm-tis-i2c >> >> - description: TPM 1.2 and 2.0 chips with vendor-specific I²C interface > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I'm ready to pick these unless Rob has anything to complain (hold > to next week). Plus, even the first patch was not tested... I already wrote it, so let's be more specific: NAK, not tested, even though testing is trivial. I don't understand why opting-out from testing, even for trivial patches like this. Automation, expressed by get_maintainers.pl, is there for a reason. Best regards, Krzysztof
