Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1600787 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-14 19:20 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-03-15 18:30 +0100 |
| Articles | 5 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-03-14 19:20 +0100
Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> - 2017-03-14 20:00 +0100
Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> - 2017-03-14 22:30 +0100
Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> - 2017-03-14 22:50 +0100
Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> - 2017-03-15 18:30 +0100
| From | Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 19:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version |
| Message-ID | <tkZd7-43W-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On 3/13/2017 3:10 AM, Peter Huewe wrote: > And yes you are right there is currently no way, except for trial and > error, for the userspace to determine this. So an interface to get > this information makes sense to me. In practice, I suspect that a single user space application won't support both TPMs. It will send the first command, get an error response code that says it's the wrong TPM, and exit. Note that, although there is no overlap in the command API, the packet format is compatible enough that a meaningful response can be returned.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 20:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: Add sysfs interface to show TPM hardware version |
| Message-ID | <tkZPR-4ju-53@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1600787 |
Am 14. März 2017 19:18:15 MEZ schrieb Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com>: >On 3/13/2017 3:10 AM, Peter Huewe wrote: > >> And yes you are right there is currently no way, except for trial and >> error, for the userspace to determine this. So an interface to get >> this information makes sense to me. > >In practice, I suspect that a single user space application won't >support both TPMs. Think of init scripts. Which daemon should it start? > It will send the first command, get an error >response code that says it's the wrong TPM, and exit. > >Note that, although there is no overlap in the command API, the packet >format is compatible enough that a meaningful response can be returned. > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >_______________________________________________ >tpmdd-devel mailing list >tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel -- Sent from my mobile
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 22:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tl2b0-66f-35@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1600824 |
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 07:58:37PM +0100, Peter Huewe wrote: > >In practice, I suspect that a single user space application won't > >support both TPMs. > Think of init scripts. > Which daemon should it start? Right, ideally we'd have a udev rule that triggers systemd to start the userspace daemons when a TPM is detected, as other hardware does. So whatever format we use has to be compatible with udev's matcher.. Jason
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 22:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tl2ul-6hH-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1600918 |
On Tue, 2017-03-14 at 15:24 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 07:58:37PM +0100, Peter Huewe wrote: > > > > In practice, I suspect that a single user space application won't > > > support both TPMs. > > Think of init scripts. > > Which daemon should it start? > > Right, ideally we'd have a udev rule that triggers systemd to start > the userspace daemons when a TPM is detected, as other hardware does. > > So whatever format we use has to be compatible with udev's matcher.. Technically, we have that already: my TPM2.0 detection stuff for udev triggers off the presence of the SUBSYSTEM=="tpmrm" that matches any TPM2 device but not a 1.x one. James
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 18:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tlkUi-2lU-31@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1600930 |
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:42:51PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2017-03-14 at 15:24 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 07:58:37PM +0100, Peter Huewe wrote: > > > > > > In practice, I suspect that a single user space application won't > > > > support both TPMs. > > > Think of init scripts. > > > Which daemon should it start? > > > > Right, ideally we'd have a udev rule that triggers systemd to start > > the userspace daemons when a TPM is detected, as other hardware does. > > > > So whatever format we use has to be compatible with udev's matcher.. > > Technically, we have that already: my TPM2.0 detection stuff for udev > triggers off the presence of the SUBSYSTEM=="tpmrm" that matches any > TPM2 device but not a 1.x one. but long term tpmrm won't be TPM2 exclusive.. Jason
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web