Eugen,
Will this go through your tree? I recently picked up maintainership of the TPM drivers, so I could send them through that. Up to you.
Cheers /Ilias
On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 10:57, Ilias Apalodimas ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 10:42, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:
On 11/4/21 3:12 AM, Mathew McBride wrote:
While doing bringup/rebase for the Ten64 I did some troubleshooting for the tpm (v1.2, NOT tpm2) command which did not appear to function, despite the Linux driver and tools (tcsd) working on the same board.
Evidently the Atmel TPM driver hasn't kept up with various step changes in the I2C and TPM stacks, and while TPMv1.2 is quite dated to TPMv2 it would be nice to make some use of the hardware that is there. (Admittedly I would love to replace our hardware TPM with an fTPM but that is a project for another day)
There are also subcommands in tpm-v1 which also have been missed in changes to the TPMv1 API and are fixed in this patchset.
I have checked that this set isn't impacted by Ilias' TPM cleanup series[1] which only touches TPMv2.
[1] - http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/cover/20211103150910.69732-1-ilias...
Mathew McBride (6): cmd: tpm-v1: fix compile error in TPMv1 list resources command cmd: tpm-v1: fix load_key_by_sha1 compile errors drivers: tpm: atmel_twi: drop non-DM_I2C compatibility drivers: tpm: atmel_twi: do not use an offset byte drivers: tpm: atmel_twi: implement get_desc operation drivers: tpm: atmel_twi: fix printf specifier compile warning
cmd/tpm-v1.c | 17 +++++++++++------ drivers/tpm/tpm_atmel_twi.c | 22 +++++++--------------- lib/tpm-v1.c | 4 ++-- 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
-- 2.30.1
Hello Mathew, Ilias,
Even if this series touches a Microchip driver/part that is not part of the at91 architecture, the patches are in my queue. I can take them through at91 tree if this is the way to go.
I am fine with that
Is there another custodian tree that is dedicated for such kind of drivers? or more specific ?
As far as I know there isn't.
Simon, your opinion on this ?
P.S. some of the patches look to be fixes most likely, so I guess it would be more likely to have them as fixes for 2022.01 release ?
Yes all of those look good. I had a minor comment on one of those, but we can always add more info on the TPM later.
Thanks /Ilias
Thanks, Eugen