[lkml]   [2019]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] tpm: Fix TPM 1.2 Shutdown sequence to prevent future TPM operations
On Wed Oct 02 19, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>On Wed Oct 02 19, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 03:57:58PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>>>On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:14:44PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>>>From: Vadim Sukhomlinov <>
>>>>commit db4d8cb9c9f2af71c4d087817160d866ed572cc9 upstream
>>>>TPM 2.0 Shutdown involve sending TPM2_Shutdown to TPM chip and disabling
>>>>future TPM operations. TPM 1.2 behavior was different, future TPM
>>>>operations weren't disabled, causing rare issues. This patch ensures
>>>>that future TPM operations are disabled.
>>>>Fixes: d1bd4a792d39 ("tpm: Issue a TPM2_Shutdown for TPM2 devices.")
>>>>Signed-off-by: Vadim Sukhomlinov <>
>>>>[dianders: resolved merge conflicts with mainline]
>>>>Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <>
>>>>Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <>
>>>>Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <>
>>>>drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c | 5 +++--
>>>>1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>What kernel version(s) is this for?
>>It would go to 4.19, we've recently reverted an incorrect backport of
>>this patch.
>>Jarkko, why is this patch 3/3? We haven't seen the first two on the
>>mailing list, do we need anything besides this patch?
>It looks like there was a problem mailing the earlier patchset, and patches 1 and 2
>weren't cc'd to stable, but patch 3 was.

Is a valid address?

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-10-02 17:43    [W:0.088 / U:18.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site