Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: use default timeout value if chip reports it as zero

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:58:26PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> On 16.01.2017 14:55, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:46:12PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:42:02AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:37:00PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> >>>> Since commit 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM
> >>>> access") Atmel 3203 TPM on ThinkPad X61S (TPM firmware version 13.9) no
> >>>> longer works.
> >>>> The initialization proceeds fine until we get and start using chip-reported
> >>>> timeouts - and the chip reports C and D timeouts of zero.
> >>>>
> >>>> It turns out that until commit 8e54caf407b98e ("tpm: Provide a generic
> >>>> means to override the chip returned timeouts") we had actually let default
> >>>> timeout values remain in this case, so let's bring back this behavior to
> >>>> make chips like Atmel 3203 work again.
> >>>>
> >>>> Use a common code that was introduced by that commit so a warning is
> >>>> printed in this case and /sys/class/tpm/tpm*/timeouts correctly says the
> >>>> timeouts aren't chip-original.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: 1107d065fdf1 ("tpm_tis: Introduce intermediate layer for TPM access")
> >>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> It's now applied to my master branch so if someone wants to
> >> test it, it should be fairly easy.
> > 
> > And I decided to squash the rename commit to it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to squash the rename commit into "fix iTPM probe via
> probe_itpm() function" patch (if it isn't too late), since they touch the
> same functionality?

It can be renamed, modified and even dropped as long as it is in my
master branch and I haven't sent pull request to James Morris.

/Jarkkok