Hi Jarkko, My response inline.
On 08/17/2016 09:45 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:48:53PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:46:40AM +0530, Nayna wrote: >>> Hi Jarkko, >>> >>> >>> >>> On 08/16/2016 02:56 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 06:02:00PM +0530, Nayna wrote: >>>>>>> Jarkko, Please let me know if it doesn't answer your question. </nayna> >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. EFI does not pass the log by any means AFAIK before a boot loader >>>>>> calls ExitBootServices(). >>>>> >>>>> So, is current TCPA support only for TPM1.2 ? >>>> >>>> TCPA ACPI table is only available for TPM 1.2. >>>> >>>> TPM2 ACPI table does not provide a memory ref for the event log. >>>> >>>>> #2, TCG Spec >>>>> http://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-content/uploads/EFI-Protocol-Specification-rev13-160330final.pdf >>>>> talks about >>>>> EFI_TCG2_PROTOCOL.GetEventLog (Section 6.5), what is that supposed to do ? >>>> >>>> Direct quote from your reference: >>>> >>>> "Boot Service Drivers are terminated when ExitBootServices() is called >>>> and all memory resources consumed by the Boot Services Drivers are >>>> released for use in the operating system environment." >>> >>> Thanks Jarkko, I understand now what you meant. >>>> >>>>>> 2. I do not have any system with TPM2 that uses DT. And as I stated >>>>>> before you didn't have any reference where you derived the DT >>>>>> node fields. >>>>> >>>>> As per Device Tree, so this is the new node introduced in the device tree >>>>> to >>>>> support TPM. And the fields are defined maintaining the requirements from >>>>> ePAPR specification. >>>> >>>> What is ePAPR specification? Can you provide a reference? >>> >>> PowerPC systems are based on device tree and derive that from ePAPR >>> specification, link below for ePAPR specification.. >>> >>> https://www.power.org/documentation/power-org-standard-for-embedded-power-architecture-platform-requirements-epapr-v1-1-2/ >> >> Thanks. I'll check that through when I review the next version. > > This specification did not define the TPM binding for DT. I searched > with "tpm" keyword from the specification. Why did you give that link? > > You earlier said that fields in TPM binding are derived from that > specification. For me this looks like total nonsense. I am sorry Jarkko, if I didn't clearly communicated. I was trying to say that tpm device tree binding is new binding added within i2c node. And for that reason, I am now submitting a patch for its binding documentation. And as ePAPR document explains about device trees and its properties, I just meant that fields defined for this new tpm node are also defined as per ePAPR spec. Please let me know if I am still not answering your question, and sorry but if you can explain me again what exactly are you looking for. Thanks & Regards, - Nayna > > /Jarkko > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
