On Thu Aug 24, 2023 at 7:43 AM EEST, Joe Perches wrote:
On Wed, 2023-08-23 at 21:24 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
[Cc: +Andy, +Joe]
Dear Jarkko, dear Andy, dear Joe,
Am 23.08.23 um 19:40 schrieb Jarkko Sakkinen:
On Wed Aug 23, 2023 at 11:23 AM EEST, Paul Menzel wrote:
Am 23.08.23 um 01:15 schrieb Jarkko Sakkinen:
The vendor check introduced by commit 554b841d4703 ("tpm: Disable RNG for all AMD fTPMs") doesn't work properly on a number of Intel fTPMs. On the reported systems the TPM doesn't reply at bootup and returns back the command code. This makes the TPM fail probe.
Since only Microsoft Pluton is the only known combination of AMD CPU and fTPM from other vendor, disable hwrng otherwise. In order to make sysadmin aware of this, print also info message to the klog.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 554b841d4703 ("tpm: Disable RNG for all AMD fTPMs") Reported-by: Todd Brandt todd.e.brandt@intel.com Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217804 Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen jarkko@kernel.org
Mario’s patch also had the three reporters below listed:
Reported-by: Patrick Steinhardt ps@pks.im Reported-by: Ronan Pigott ronan@rjp.ie Reported-by: Raymond Jay Golo rjgolo@gmail.com
The problem here is that checkpatch throws three warnings:
WARNING: Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Closes: with a URL to the report #19: Reported-by: Patrick Steinhardt ps@pks.im Reported-by: Ronan Pigott ronan@rjp.ie
WARNING: Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Closes: with a URL to the report #20: Reported-by: Ronan Pigott ronan@rjp.ie Reported-by: Raymond Jay Golo rjgolo@gmail.com
WARNING: Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Closes: with a URL to the report #21: Reported-by: Raymond Jay Golo rjgolo@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen jarkko@kernel.org
Since bugzilla is not part of the documented process afaik, I used this field as the guideline:
Reported: 2023-08-17 20:59 UTC by Todd Brandt
How otherwise I should interpret kernel bugzilla?
How is the proper process to add more than one reporter (so they are noted and also added to CC), so that checkpatch.pl does not complain?
Kind regards,
Paul
In any case new version is still needed as the commit message must contain a mention of "Lenovo Legion Y540" as the stimulus for doing this code change in the first place.
BR, Jarkko
Well, if it's really desired to allow multiple consecutive reported-by: lines, maybe:
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 528f619520eb9..5b5c11ad04087 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -3179,6 +3179,8 @@ sub process { if (!defined $lines[$linenr]) { WARN("BAD_REPORTED_BY_LINK", "Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Closes: with a URL to the report\n" . $herecurr . "\n");
} elsif ($rawlines[$linenr] =~ /^\s*reported(?:|-and-tested)-by:/i) {; } elsif ($rawlines[$linenr] !~ /^closes:\s*/i) { WARN("BAD_REPORTED_BY_LINK", "Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Closes: with a URL to the report\n" . $herecurr . $rawlines[$linenr] . "\n");
Kind of opposing this because:
1. Bugzilla has a reporter field. 2. The request is now, if I understood this correctly, to add reported-by field to all people who have left a comment. 3. There is a field for the reporter, which points out to a single person. Why all the possible commenters and not the creator of the report?
BR, Jarkko