Hi, On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:43 PM Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:35:33PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > Careful with this, you can't backport this to any kernels that don't > > > have the sysfs ops locking changes or they will crash in sysfs code. > > > > Oops, I was way too fast! Thanks Jason. > > Hmm... hold on a second. > > How would the crash realize? I mean this is at the point when user space > should not be active. Secondly, why the crash would not realize with > TPM2? The only thing the fix is doing is to do the same thing with TPM1 > essentially. I will continue to remind that I'm pretty TPM-clueless (mostly I just took someone else's patch and posted it), but I will note that people on the Chrome OS team seemed concerned by the sysfs locking too. After seeing Jason's message this morning I dug a little bit and found <https://crbug.com/819265> -Doug
