On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 10:43:05AM +0100, Dirk Gouders wrote:
> Jarkko Sakkinen writes:
>
> > On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:07 +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
> >> There is a missing call to tpm_request_locality before the call to
> >> the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the
Jarkko Sakkinen writes:
> On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:07 +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
>> There is a missing call to tpm_request_locality before the call to
>> the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
>> approach might work for tpm2, it fails for tpm1.x - in that case
>>
On Sat, 2021-01-30 at 22:40 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:07 +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
> > There is a missing call to tpm_request_locality before the call to
> > the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
> > approach might work for tpm2, it
On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:07 +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
> There is a missing call to tpm_request_locality before the call to
> the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
> approach might work for tpm2, it fails for tpm1.x - in that case
> call to tpm_get_timeouts() or
Hi Lukasz,
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 02:07:53PM +0100, Lukasz Majczak wrote:
> There is a missing call to tpm_request_locality before the call to
> the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
> approach might work for tpm2, it fails for tpm1.x - in that case
> call to
There is a missing call to tpm_request_locality before the call to
the tpm_get_timeouts() and tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(). As the current
approach might work for tpm2, it fails for tpm1.x - in that case
call to tpm_get_timeouts() or tpm_tis_probe_irq_single()
without locality fails and in turn
6 matches
Mail list logo