[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170224125743.dtiot3ygqstneve4@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 14:57:43 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Huewe <peter.huewe@...ineon.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peterhuewe@....de, Christophe Ricard <christophe-h.ricard@...com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Steffen <Alexander.Steffen@...ineon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] tpm_tis_spi: Check correct byte for wait state
indicator
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 04:08:24PM +0000, Peter Huewe wrote:
> Wait states are signaled in the last byte received from the TPM in
> response to the header, not the first byte. Check rx_buf[3] instead of
> rx_buf[0].
>
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>
> Fixes: 0edbfea537d1 ("tpm/tpm_tis_spi: Add support for spi phy")
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Steffen <Alexander.Steffen@...ineon.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Huewe <peter.huewe@...ineon.com>
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkien <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
/Jarkko
> ---
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c
> index d782b9974c14..16938e2253d2 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ static int tpm_tis_spi_transfer(struct tpm_tis_data *data, u32 addr, u8 len,
> u8 *buffer, u8 direction)
> {
> struct tpm_tis_spi_phy *phy = to_tpm_tis_spi_phy(data);
> - int ret, i;
> + int ret;
> struct spi_message m;
> struct spi_transfer spi_xfer = {
> .tx_buf = phy->tx_buf,
> @@ -85,25 +85,27 @@ static int tpm_tis_spi_transfer(struct tpm_tis_data *data, u32 addr, u8 len,
> if (ret < 0)
> goto exit;
>
> - phy->tx_buf[0] = 0;
> -
> - /* According to TCG PTP specification, if there is no TPM present at
> - * all, then the design has a weak pull-up on MISO. If a TPM is not
> - * present, a pull-up on MISO means that the SB controller sees a 1,
> - * and will latch in 0xFF on the read.
> - */
> - for (i = 0; (phy->rx_buf[0] & 0x01) == 0 && i < TPM_RETRY; i++) {
> - spi_xfer.len = 1;
> - spi_message_init(&m);
> - spi_message_add_tail(&spi_xfer, &m);
> - ret = spi_sync_locked(phy->spi_device, &m);
> - if (ret < 0)
> + if ((phy->rx_buf[3] & 0x01) == 0) {
> + // handle SPI wait states
> + int i;
> +
> + phy->tx_buf[0] = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < TPM_RETRY; i++) {
> + spi_xfer.len = 1;
> + spi_message_init(&m);
> + spi_message_add_tail(&spi_xfer, &m);
> + ret = spi_sync_locked(phy->spi_device, &m);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto exit;
> + if (phy->rx_buf[0] & 0x01)
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + if (i == TPM_RETRY) {
> + ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> goto exit;
> - }
> -
> - if (i == TPM_RETRY) {
> - ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> - goto exit;
> + }
> }
>
> spi_xfer.cs_change = 0;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists