Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 12 Mar 2019 16:55:53 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>
Cc:     Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Make timeout logic simpler and more robust
Message-ID: <20190312145553.GB6682@linux.intel.com>
References: <358e89ed2b766d51b5f57abf31ab7a925ac63379.1552348123.git.calvinowens@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <358e89ed2b766d51b5f57abf31ab7a925ac63379.1552348123.git.calvinowens@fb.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 04:54:04PM -0700, Calvin Owens wrote:
> We're having lots of problems with TPM commands timing out, and we're
> seeing these problems across lots of different hardware (both v1/v2).
> 
> I instrumented the driver to collect latency data, but I wasn't able to
> find any specific timeout to fix: it seems like many of them are too
> aggressive. So I tried replacing all the timeout logic with a single
> universal long timeout, and found that makes our TPMs 100% reliable.
> 
> Given that this timeout logic is very complex, problematic, and appears
> to serve no real purpose, I propose simply deleting all of it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>

In the current form the commit is doing way too much. I would like to
consider duration (command-response latency) and timeouts (state change
latency) separately.

/Jarkko