[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZEag1lAonYcmNFXk@orome>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 17:31:34 +0200
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Krishna Yarlagadda <kyarlagadda@...dia.com>,
jsnitsel@...hat.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, peterhuewe@....de,
jgg@...pe.ca, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jonathanh@...dia.com, skomatineni@...dia.com, ldewangan@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [Patch V10 2/3] tpm_tis-spi: Add hardware wait polling
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 04:18:45PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 04:46:24PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>
> > Would it make sense for you to pick up patch 2/3 as well? As far as I
> > can tell there's a build dependency on patch 1/3 because of the newly
> > added SPI_TPM_HW_FLOW symbol.
>
> I'll include it in my pull request for spi this time round so it should
> end up in -rc1, my thinking was that I was happy with the SPI bits and
> if it was in -rc1 then the TPM bits could be handled without cross tree
> issues when the review was sorted (which it is now but wasn't at the
> time). If the SPI side doesn't make -rc1 for some reason I can pick up
> the TPM bit as well, and/or do a signed tag.
Sounds good.
Thanks,
Thierry
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists