Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752638AbbFHLyp (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2015 07:54:45 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:32593 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752174AbbFHLyi (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2015 07:54:38 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,573,1427785200"; d="scan'208";a="739352467" Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 14:54:35 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Peter Huewe Cc: Marcel Selhorst , Jason Gunthorpe , "moderated list:TPM DEVICE DRIVER" , open list Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm, tpm_crb: migrate to struct acpi_table_tpm2 and acpi_tpm2_control Message-ID: <20150608115435.GA19358@jsakkine-mobl1> References: <1432915058-5598-1-git-send-email-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1931 Lines: 68 Hi I somehow missed your reply to this last week. On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:00:37PM +0200, Peter Huewe wrote: > Hi > >Betreff: [PATCH] tpm, tpm_crb: migrate to struct acpi_table_tpm2 and acpi_tpm2_control > > Migrate to struct acpi_table_tpm2 and struct acpi_tpm2_control defined > > in include/acpi/actbl3.h from the internal structures. > > I definitely do like the idea! Thanks for spotting this! > > However one small remark > > -struct crb_control_area { > > - u32 req; > > - u32 sts; > > - u32 cancel; > > - u32 start; > > - u32 int_enable; > > - u32 int_sts; > > - u32 cmd_size; > > - u64 cmd_pa; > > - u32 rsp_size; > > - u64 rsp_pa; > > -} __packed; > > - > > > > - if (le32_to_cpu(ioread32(&priv->cca->sts)) & CRB_CA_STS_ERROR) > > + if (le32_to_cpu(ioread32(&priv->ctl->error)) & CRB_CA_STS_ERROR) > > return -EIO; > > I know the fields are described in include/acpi/actbl3.h as > +struct acpi_tpm2_control { > + u32 reserved; > + u32 error; > + u32 cancel; > + u32 start; > + u64 interrupt_control; > + u32 command_size; > + u64 command_address; > + u32 response_size; > + u64 response_address; > +}; > > but are the names there still correct? Isn't this information outdated? > The acpi spec refers to the MS spec which is not present anymore, and MS refers to the TCG -- and in the PTP your names are used. > > ---> We should update the ACPI header? > At least the naming for reserved and error. > What do you think? I think you are right. It does not make sense to degrade here. I'll prepare "CRB fixes" patch set and also include a workaround for this bug: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98181 See my last comment. > Thanks, > Peter /Jarkko -- 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/