On 2/20/24 2:26 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Tue Feb 20, 2024 at 8:54 PM UTC, Lino Sanfilippo wrote:
for (i = 0; i <= MAX_LOCALITY; i++)
__tpm_tis_relinquish_locality(priv, i);
I'm pretty unfamiliar with Intel TXT so asking a dummy question:
if Intel TXT uses locality 2 I suppose we s
e needs to be patched in the series given that
tpm_chip_set_locality() returns zero on success.
It is not really my problem but I'm also wondering how the
initialization order is managed. What if e.g. IMA happens to
initialize before slmodule?
Cc: Daniel P. Smith
Cc: Ross Philipson
Cc: Ard
e needs to be patched in the series given that
tpm_chip_set_locality() returns zero on success.
It is not really my problem but I'm also wondering how the
initialization order is managed. What if e.g. IMA happens to
initialize before slmodule?
Cc: Daniel P. Smith
Cc: Ross Philipson
Cc: Ard
s to
initialize before slmodule?
Cc: Daniel P. Smith
Cc: Ross Philipson
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel
Cc: Thomas Gleixner
Daniel P. Smith (2):
tpm, tpm_tis: Close all localities
tpm, tpm_tis: Address positive localities in
tpm_tis_request_locality()
Ross Philipson (2):
tpm, tpm_ti
DRTM needs to be able to set the locality used by kernel. Provide
a one-shot function tpm_chip_set_locality() for the purpose.
Signed-off-by: Ross Philipson
Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen
---
drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c | 33 -
drivers/char/tpm
