On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 09:49:02AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-20 at 23:05 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > 'tabrm4' branch has been now rebased. It's now on top of master > > branch > > that contains Stefan's latest patch (min body length check) that I've > > reviewed and tested. It also contains your updated /dev/tpms patch. > > > > I guess the 5 commits that are there now are such that we have fairly > > good consensus, don't we? If so, can I add your reviewed-by and > > tested-by to my commits and vice versa? > > We're still failing my test_transients. This is the full python of the > test case: > > > def test_transients(self): > k = self.open_transients() > self.c.flush_context(k[0]) > self.c.change_auth(self.c.SRK, k[1], None, pwd1) > ... > > It's failing at self.c.flush_context(k[0]) with TPM_RC_VALUE. It's the > same problem Ken complained about: TPM2_FlushContext doesn't have a > declared handle area so we don't translate the handle being sent down. > We have to fix this either by intercepting the flush and manually > translating the context, or by being dangerously clever and marking > flush as a command which takes one handle.
I'll add interception of flush to the next patch set version. /Jarkko
