[SLOF] [PATCH v4 00/33] Add vTPM support to SLOF

[Stefan Berger]

On 1/3/20 11:11 AM, Stefan Berger wrote:
> On 1/2/20 6:21 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>
>> On 03/01/2020 01:20, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>> On 12/27/19 11:11 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 28/12/2019 08:13, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>>>> On 12/23/19 6:41 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/12/2019 08:40, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/18/19 6:05 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's been a while since the last attempt :) 33 is a lot! Comments
>>>>>>>> below...
>>>>>>> I have a series of patches now here with some of the concerns
>>>>>>> addressed.
>>>>>>> I would say it's bisectable but my concern is that reshuffling more
>>>>>>> code
>>>>>>> will cause issues that aren't there right now. So I would 
>>>>>>> appreciate
>>>>>>> some tolerance for refactoring while building up TPM 2 support.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/stefanberger/SLOF-tpm/commits/SLOF-tpm.Dec2019.23 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> imho you are overthinking this. This needs to be several 
>>>>>> prerequisite
>>>>>> patches (one per lib/directory/driver/whatever), one patch for 
>>>>>> vtpm v1
>>>>> What are prerequisites? Are these functions needed by lib/libtpm but
>>>>> are located in other directories?
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>>> I have certainly not put the patches in random order, so they do
>>>>> compile at every step and functions needed in one step are introduced
>>>>> before it.
>>>> Good.
>>>>
>>>>>> (and I still eagerly want to hear why we want v1 at all), one 
>>>>>> patch for
>>>>> The application stack for TSS 1.2 is (still) being packaged for 
>>>>> ppc64le:
>>>>
>>>> Ok. But what about v2.0? "trousers" does not support it?
>>>
>>> There is different stack for TPM 2.0, actually there are two:
>>>
>>> - tss2 (IBM):
>>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=23163
>>>
>>> - tpm2-tss (Intel):
>>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1422031
>>
>> You are really not helping :)
>>
>> What if we decide to only support "tss2 (IBM)"? Would we still need 
>> v1.2?
>
>
> Recent Tss2 project also has TPM 1.2 support now, but it can be 
> compiled out. So, it depends on what you want to have on this level as 
> well.
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/ibmtpm20tss/tss/ci/master/tree/
>
> See utils12 directory. If you reject TPM 1.2 altogether there's of 
> course no point in supporting it for anyone.
>
>
Thoughts?