Hi,
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
Dear Simon Glass,
Hi Wolfgang,
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Simon Glass,
In message 1351902453-27956-18-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org you wrote:
From: Luigi Semenzato semenzato@chromium.org
Add a simple command to stress-test a TPM (Trusted Platform Module).
Signed-off-by: Luigi Semenzato semenzato@chromium.org
Commit-Ready: Stefan Reinauer reinauer@google.com Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
common/cmd_tpm.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
See previous comments about TPM code. Please let's dump all this unused stuff.
As mentioned, patches are pending to enable this for two boards (ARM and x86).
Hm, does this TPM argument still go on?
Actually, my position is I'd be all for dumping it right away (I even posted a patch some time ago), if it wasn't for SJG posting patches adding another TPM chip. Moreover, now I see there are patches for cmd_tpm.c . So I see a lot of effort invested into doing the TPM right.
What is the actual problem with keeping this code in our codebase and patching it then? It's all used now, problem solved, or am I missing something?
Yes there has been quite a bit of effort on this. I hope we can keep this code, and perhaps even others way wish to help. I am looking at how to create a very simple kernel verification method based around a FIT image.
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Regards, Simon