Attention is currently required from: Tim Wawrzynczak, Christian Walter, Julius Werner, Angel Pons, Jett Rink. Jes Klinke has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/63158 )
Change subject: tpm: Allow separate handling of Google Ti50 TPM ......................................................................
Patch Set 17:
(3 comments)
File src/drivers/spi/tpm/tpm.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/63158/comment/011737fb_f672e677 PS16, Line 502: (tpm_info.vendor_id == 0x1ae0
FWIW I'm not sure why this check is here in the first place. […]
Done
File src/drivers/tpm/cr50.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/63158/comment/456acd0a_57b8bd4b PS16, Line 104: if (!CONFIG(TPM_GOOGLE_CR50))
So now you check the same Kconfig both in the caller and the callee... […]
Done
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/63158/comment/46e03135_c7973342 PS16, Line 158: return false;
Does this line have any purpose? We don't have a TPM_GOOGLE that's neither cr50 nor ti50 right now, […]
You are right that we do not need to guard against "unrecognized" GSCs which do not support long enough pulses, as we have none, and any future GSC_TI50_OPENTITAN will also use long pulses as the only option.