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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200114141647.109347-1-ardb@kernel.org> <20200114141647.109347-3-ardb@kernel.org>
 <ada03416b1b362fa255feb45257414655d8ab023.camel@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <ada03416b1b362fa255feb45257414655d8ab023.camel@linux.intel.com>
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:29:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu-9KvzLEcNQnRfsOkU=5oc1otY_NS15fR5Oi4Z4UVvurw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] tpm: tis: add support for MMIO TPM on SynQuacer
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>,
        Devicetree List <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_H=C3=BCwe?= <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 13:27, Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-01-14 at 15:16 +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > When fitted, the SynQuacer platform exposes its SPI TPM via a MMIO
> > window that is backed by the SPI command sequencer in the SPI bus
> > controller. This arrangement has the limitation that only byte size
> > accesses are supported, and so we'll need to provide a separate set
> > of read and write accessors that take this into account.
>
> What is SynQuacer platform?
>

It is an arm64 SoC manufactured by Socionext.

> I'm also missing a resolution why tpm_tis.c is extended to handle both
> and not add tpm_tis_something.c instead. It does not follow the pattern
> we have in place (e.g. look up tpm_tis_spi.c).
>

We could easily do that instead, if preferred. It's just that it would
duplicate a bit of code.