Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <1597597933.8344.13.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] docs: update trusted-encrypted.rst
From:   James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>
Reply-To: jejb@linux.ibm.com
To:     Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
Cc:     Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Sun, 16 Aug 2020 10:12:13 -0700
In-Reply-To: <f9d4c4a9-5059-eae2-bc89-51f16e8ca4d9@suse.de>
References: <20200815075143.47082-1-colyli@suse.de>
         <cf667ea0-dab7-a242-886c-938582c62ff6@linux.ibm.com>
         <1597595769.8344.7.camel@linux.ibm.com>
         <f9d4c4a9-5059-eae2-bc89-51f16e8ca4d9@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 00:57 +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> On 2020/8/17 00:36, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-08-16 at 12:06 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > [...]
> > > A note in this file states this:
> > > 
> > > Note: When using a TPM 2.0 with a persistent key with handle
> > > 0x81000001, append 'keyhandle=0x81000001' to statements between
> > > quotes, such as "new 32 keyhandle=0x81000001".
> > > 
> > > Now if someone was (still) interested in TPM 1.2 
> > > adapt the  note to state that these keyhandle=... should be
> > > removed for the TPM 1.2 case.
> > 
> > Actually, I also have a plan to match what userspace does and
> > simply assume a keyhandle of 40000001 (generate an EC Storage
> > Primary Key on the fly) if it's not specified, which will make the
> > TPM1.2 and 2.0 versions of this the same.  Unfortunately the
> > necessary precursor patches are taking an age to get upstream.
> 
> Hi James,
> 
> Do you have a plan to push such patches into upstream soon? If yes
> than I may wait for your patch and withdraw this one.

Well, as I said above it depends on not yet upstream precursor patches.
 They have been pending for about a year, so I've no real idea of the
timeline.

James