On 12/20/2017 06:44 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 05:45:16PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> CHP51 says "LPC Clock Control Using the LPC_CLKRUN# May Not Behave As >> Expected" >> and that the implication is that "The SoC may prevent a peripheral device >> from >> successfully requesting the LPC clock". > > Now we are back to the beginning - the LPC_CLKRUN protocol is simply > broken in BSW chipsets, and it has nothing to do with the TPM? > > Intel is trying to work around that broken-ness and still preserve > power management in the case where only the TPM is connected to the > LPC bus.. It is questionable to me if this is even a good idea, or if > Linux is the right place to implement this work around (eg something > in SMM mode may be more appropriate for a chipset bug) > > I think your patch is still the right improvement, if the BIOS turned > the feature off, we should not turn it back on. >
Yes, the patch has merits on its own since fixes a flaw in the logic of the original CLKRUN patch. I think we should merge it and then the other issues can be fixed (or rework how the CLKRUN is managed) as follow-ups. > Jason > Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat
