Re: [PATCH 5/6] tpm_tis: convert from pnp_driver to acpi_driver
From: Rajiv Andrade
Date: Thu Sep 10 2009 - 15:08:57 EST
On Mon, 2009年07月20日 at 11:27 -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
>
On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 10:45:19AM -0300, Rajiv Andrade wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2009年07月01日 at 11:01 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > On 2009年6月30日 18:04:14 -0700
>
> > Andy Isaacson <adi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > Not all TIS-compatible TPM chips have a _HID method in their ACPI entry,
>
> > > and the TPM spec says that the _CID method should be used to enumerate
>
> > > the TPM chip.
>
> >
>
> > There are a number of systems with TPMs (older laptops) that don't work
>
> > very well if you enable ACPI.
>
> >
>
> > This is therefore a regression - NAK
>
> >
>
> > Probably the best thing to do is to provide both ACPI and PnP
>
> > registration according to what is configured into the kernel. (And I
>
> > guess spot duplicates although the resource should be busy anyway)
>
> > --
>
> David sent this earlier when I said that PNP didn't work with this chip:
>
>
>
> <quote>
>
> The problem here is acpi pnp but the fix is really simple. The current
>
> pnpacpi/core.c routine that looks for isapnp devices enumerated in acpi
>
> enforces that the acpi hid be a valid isapnp id (the formats are
>
> slightly different). But that's broken: it shoudl be enforcing that
>
> either the acpi hid or any acpi cids be valid isapnp ids. It's a
>
> one-line change to do this, see patch 2.
>
>
>
> commit 7a553b4e7439ad0733da7da8663d32aa4865aa9e
>
> Author: David Smith <dds@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Date: Tue Apr 28 18:52:02 2009 +0900
>
>
>
> Update ACPI PNP to support devices with EISA PNP CIDs but non-PNP HIDs
>
>
>
> Signed-off-by: David Smith <dds@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c b/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c
>
> index 9496494..8bfddfb 100644
>
> --- a/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c
>
> +++ b/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c
>
> @@ -159,8 +159,8 @@ static int __init pnpacpi_add_device(struct acpi_device *device)
>
> * driver should not be loaded.
>
> */
>
> status = acpi_get_handle(device->handle, "_CRS", &temp);
>
> - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !ispnpidacpi(acpi_device_hid(device)) ||
>
> - is_exclusive_device(device) || (!device->status.present))
>
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || is_exclusive_device(device) ||
>
> + (!device->status.present))
>
> return 0;
>
>
>
> dev = pnp_alloc_dev(&pnpacpi_protocol, num, acpi_device_hid(device));
>
>
>
> </quote>
>
>
Len,
>
>
Is this an acceptable change to pnpacpi? It resolves an issue with
>
tpm_tis but I'm concerned that it might have far-reaching impact.
>
>
I've pasted in the problematic DSDT (manually fixing up whitespace to
>
make it more readable), and then a normal TPM simply has a _HID which
>
is matched by a pnp_device_id table in the driver
>
(drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c).
>
>
T400:
>
Device (TPM)
>
{
>
Method (_HID, 0, NotSerialized)
>
{
>
TPHY (0x00)
>
If (LEqual (TPMV, 0x01)) { Return (0x0201D824) }
>
If (LEqual (TPMV, 0x02)) { Return (0x0435CF4D) }
>
If (LEqual (TPMV, 0x03)) { Return (0x02016D08) }
>
If (LEqual (TPMV, 0x04)) { Return (0x01016D08) }
>
If (LOr (LEqual (TPMV, 0x05), LEqual (TPMV, 0x06))) {
>
Return (0x0010A35C)
>
}
>
If (LEqual (TPMV, 0x08)) { Return (0x00128D06) }
>
If (LEqual (TPMV, 0x09)) { Return ("INTC0102") }
>
Return (0x310CD041)
>
}
>
>
Name (_CID, EisaId ("PNP0C31"))
>
>
standard TPM:
>
Device (TPM)
>
{
>
Name (_HID, EisaId ("BCM0102"))
>
Name (_CID, EisaId ("PNP0C31"))
>
>
The full thread is at
>
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/1/265
>
>
Thanks for any insight.
>
We've already waited too much on this, is it acceptable to make the
workaround depend on (and only on) the module parameter you've set in
patch 6/6? Therefore no need to check the vendor ID.
<snip>
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(itpm, "Force iTPM workarounds (found on some Lenovo laptops)");
</snip>
It already mentions _Force_, which in many cases maps to "it's all your
responsibility"...
And yes, still without PNP, but at least, working.
Rajiv
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/