[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y/9HB/KF2Kjkihkg@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 12:37:27 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: Krishna Yarlagadda <kyarlagadda@...dia.com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"peterhuewe@....de" <peterhuewe@....de>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch V5 2/3] tpm_tis-spi: Support hardware wait polling
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 08:27:45AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 11:56:53AM +0000, Krishna Yarlagadda wrote:
> > TPM device connected behind half duplex controller can only work
> > this way. So, no additional flag needed to check.
> Just because a DT hooks it up this way doesn't mean the kernel driver
> can support it, eg support hasn't been implemented in an older SPI
> driver or something.
> If the failure mode is anything other than the TPM doesn't probe we
> will need to check for support.
It's not like these buses are hot pluggable - someone would have to
design and manufacture a board which doesn't work. It's probably
reasonable for this to fail with the SPI subsystem saying it can't
support things when the operation is tried.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists