On 1/29/21 2:49 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 09:18:46AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> Hi Lukasz,
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 02:42:47AM +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
>>> There is a missing call to start_tpm_chip before the call to
>>> the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
>>> approach maight work for tpm2, it fails for tpm1.x - in that case
>>> call to tpm_get_timeouts() or tpm_tis_probe_irq_single() tries to
>>> transmit TPM commands on a disabled chip what what doesn't succeed
>>
>> s/what what/what/
> 
> s/maight/might/
> 
> Also, would be nice to have the capatalization of acronyms correct
> and consistent. E.g. tpm1.x should be rather written as "TPM 1.x
> chips".
> 
> It's also incorrect to state that something fails for TPM 1.x chips,
> unless you can somehow make a sense that every single TPM 1.x at wild
> fails, which probably is not true.
> 
>>> and in turn causes tpm_tis_core_init() to fail.
>>> Tested on Samsung Chromebook Pro (Caroline).
> 
> Anyone can tell me what does Caroline mean anyway?
> 

"Caroline" is the code name for Samsung Chromebook Pro. The term
"Samsung Chromebook Pro (Caroline)" is quite widely used for this
system. Or, alternatively, "Caroline (Samsung Chromebook Pro)".

Guenter

Reply via email to