On 2020/8/17 00:36, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2020-08-16 at 12:06 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote: > [...] >> A note in this file states this: >> >> Note: When using a TPM 2.0 with a persistent key with handle >> 0x81000001, append 'keyhandle=0x81000001' to statements between >> quotes, such as "new 32 keyhandle=0x81000001". >> >> Now if someone was (still) interested in TPM 1.2 then the below >> changes you are proposing wouldn't work for them. Maybe you should >> adapt the note to state that these keyhandle=... should be removed >> for the TPM 1.2 case. > > Actually, I also have a plan to match what userspace does and simply > assume a keyhandle of 40000001 (generate an EC Storage Primary Key on > the fly) if it's not specified, which will make the TPM1.2 and 2.0 > versions of this the same. Unfortunately the necessary precursor > patches are taking an age to get upstream.
Hi James, Do you have a plan to push such patches into upstream soon? If yes than I may wait for your patch and withdraw this one. Thanks. Coly Li
