lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [Patch V10 2/3] tpm_tis-spi: Add hardware wait polling
Date

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
> Sent: 24 April 2023 21:02
> To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>; Krishna Yarlagadda
> <kyarlagadda@nvidia.com>; jsnitsel@redhat.com; robh+dt@kernel.org;
> peterhuewe@gmx.de; jgg@ziepe.ca; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org;
> linux-spi@vger.kernel.org; linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> integrity@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Jonathan Hunter
> <jonathanh@nvidia.com>; Sowjanya Komatineni
> <skomatineni@nvidia.com>; Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.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

Mark,
Now that SPI changes are in, can we pull this TPM change for rc2.
Will this be picked into SPI or TPM list?
Thanks,
KY

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-05-10 17:11    [W:1.067 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site