Re: [PATCH] tpm_tis: Add missing start/stop_tpm_chip calls

[Guenter Roeck]

On 1/29/21 2:49 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 09:18:46AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> Hi Lukasz,
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 02:42:47AM +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
>>> There is a missing call to start_tpm_chip before the call to
>>> the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
>>> approach maight work for tpm2, it fails for tpm1.x - in that case
>>> call to tpm_get_timeouts() or tpm_tis_probe_irq_single() tries to
>>> transmit TPM commands on a disabled chip what what doesn't succeed
>>
>> s/what what/what/
> 
> s/maight/might/
> 
> Also, would be nice to have the capatalization of acronyms correct
> and consistent. E.g. tpm1.x should be rather written as "TPM 1.x
> chips".
> 
> It's also incorrect to state that something fails for TPM 1.x chips,
> unless you can somehow make a sense that every single TPM 1.x at wild
> fails, which probably is not true.
> 
>>> and in turn causes tpm_tis_core_init() to fail.
>>> Tested on Samsung Chromebook Pro (Caroline).
> 
> Anyone can tell me what does Caroline mean anyway?
> 

"Caroline" is the code name for Samsung Chromebook Pro. The term
"Samsung Chromebook Pro (Caroline)" is quite widely used for this
system. Or, alternatively, "Caroline (Samsung Chromebook Pro)".

Guenter