[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z7b11Kahh7JXDq9E@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 11:28:52 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>
Cc: linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, peterhuewe@....de, jgg@...pe.ca,
sudeep.holla@....com, rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] tpm_crb: implement driver compliant to CRB over
FF-A
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 02:10:10PM -0600, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> The Arm specification TPM Service CRB over FF-A specification
> defines the FF-A messages to interact with a CRB-based TPM
> implemented as an FF-A secure partition.
>
> Spec URL:
> https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0138/latest/
>
> This driver is probed when a TPM Secure Partition is
> discovered by the FF-A subsystem. It exposes APIs
> used by the TPM CRB driver to send notifications to
> the TPM.
>
> Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>
Cutting hairs now but as I cannot test this and this is 1/5:
can this patch be run without 2/5-4/5?
The policy is that every patch should leave kernel tree to
a state where it compiles and runs.
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists