[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1fc66c1b942e5c0855cea3445bfe33fc3a1c1ad2.camel@guzman.io>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 15:34:56 -0700
From: Alex Guzman <alex@...man.io>
To: Tadeusz Struk <tstruk@...il.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@...l.com>,
Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jeffrin Jose T <jeffrin@...agiritech.edu.in>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Revert "tpm: fix invalid locking in NONBLOCKING
mode"
On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 14:33 -0700, Tadeusz Struk wrote:
> On 5/26/20 1:00 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > I don't think there is a root cause other than a TIS TPM is getting
> > annoyed by us cycling localities too rapidly because we don't do an
> > actual TPM operation between request and relinquish. Since the
> > first
> > request/relinquish seems unnecessary for the async case, moving the
> > ops
> > get eliminates the problem.
>
> Could be, so maybe we could try both patches.
> More debug info on the error path won't hurt.
> Thanks,
> Tadeusz
With your logging patch, I consistently see this message in dmesg when
tpm2_getcap fails:
tpm tpm0: request_locality: failed to request locality 0 after 750 ms
Powered by blists - more mailing lists