On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 11:16:56AM -0700, Josh Zimmerman wrote: > Hm, according to include/linux/pm.h, > > * It is allowed to unregister devices while the above callbacks are being > * executed. However, a callback routine MUST NOT try to > unregister the device > * it was called for, although it may unregister children of that device > (for > * example, if it detects that a child was unplugged while the system was > * asleep). > > So, it seems if we want to add shutdown to class->pm, we'll need to do > the refactoring for sysfs now to avoid the implicit lock in order to > safely NULL out chip->ops. (Otherwise, I believe we'd need to > unregister.)\\ > > I'll start work on that, but I wanted to send this email first to > double-check that my understanding was correct and I wasn't missing an > easier path.
Like I said, if you guard shutdown with a 'if TPM2' then the sysfs case cannot occur.. It eventually needs to be fixed for TPM1, but a TPM2 only first step would be OK too. Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
