Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753507Ab2KLPUL (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:20:11 -0500 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]:38596 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751508Ab2KLPUI (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:20:08 -0500 Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:18:48 -0600 From: Kent Yoder To: Peter.Huewe@infineon.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: add documentation for sysfs interfaces Message-ID: <20121112151846.GA31987@ennui.austin.ibm.com> References: <20121108171006.GA30286@ennui.austin.ibm.com> <74A44E99E3274B4CB570415926B37D440F6973@MUCSE501.eu.infineon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <74A44E99E3274B4CB570415926B37D440F6973@MUCSE501.eu.infineon.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12111215-3534-0000-0000-00000EDCE913 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2040 Lines: 61 Hi Peter, On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 08:47:55AM +0000, Peter.Huewe@infineon.com wrote: > Hi Kent, > > thanks a lot for this effort! > I really appreciate it. > > > +What: /sys/class/misc/tpmX/device/active > > +Date: April 2006 > > +KernelVersion: 2.6.17 > > +Contact: tpmdd-devel@lists.sf.net > > +Description: The "active" property prints a '1' if the TPM chip is accepting > > + commands. An inactive TPM chip still contains all the state of > > + an active chip (Storage Root Key, NVRAM, etc), and can be > > + visible to the OS, but will not accept commands. > > Hmm, I know this is a tricky one (enabled/activated). > maybe this would be better as: > - visible to the OS, but will not accept commands. > + visible to the OS, but will only accept a restricted set of commands. > + See TCG specification(...) for more information. Yeah that's more accurate. I'm just inclined to point to the design principles and structures spec here unless you have a better idea. Both have enabled/activated info scattered throughout them. Sigh. :) > > > > +What: /sys/class/misc/tpmX/device/cancel > > +Date: June 2005 > > +KernelVersion: 2.6.13 > > +Contact: tpmdd-devel@lists.sf.net > > +Description: The "cancel" property allows you to cancel the currently > > + pending TPM command. Echoing any value to cancel will call the > > + TPM vendor specific cancel operation. > > I'd go for writing instead of echoing but this might only be bike-shedding. > - pending TPM command. Echoing any value to cancel will call the > + pending TPM command. Writing any value to cancel will call the Sounds good. Thanks, Kent > > The rest is great. > Reviewed-by: Peter Huewe > Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe > > > Thanks, > Peter > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/