On 03/07/2018 10:33 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
Thank you for your quick response.
Am Dienstag, den 06.03.2018, 11:57 -0500 schrieb Stephen Douthit:
On 03/06/2018 11:04 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
On 03/02/18 17:31, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 02:17:08PM -0500, Stephen Douthit wrote:
> Thanks. I committed this series.
The second commit introduced a regression with coreboot on the
ASRock E350M1. There are a bunch of time-outs, causing the startup
to be really slow. With no serial console, the user thinks, it’s
not working and start to debug.
Looking through the the user manual for that board I don't see that it
has a TPM, or even the header for one, so a timeout seems correct.
Indeed, no TPM is present.
Thanks for confirming.
750ms timeouts does seem pretty painful though. I hadn't
considered that tis_probe() would be called multiple times if no TPM
What's the preferred way to have a probe function run and bail before
rerunning the timeout? Just put a static flag in tis_probe()? The
attached patch takes that approach. Please let me know if that fixes
the issue for you, or if there's some other preferred pattern I should
Unfortunately, that didn’t help.
$ git log --oneline -2
fd1cbb4 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) tpm: Save tis_probe() result to
avoid a reun of lengthy timeouts
5adc8bd tpm: Handle unimplemented TIS_REG_IFACE_ID in tis_get_tpm_version()
And the time-outs seem to be around 20 seconds or more. Please find the
log with time stamps attached (`sudo ./readserial.py /dev/ttyUSB0`).
Yikes, 20 seconds is the medium duration timeout, not the default A
timeout of 750ms. I was poking the wrong area with the last patch.
It looks like tis_probe() is propagating the return from
tis_wait_access() in the no device present case.
FYI, even adding 5ms to the boot time is unacceptable. Is there
anyway to verify the hardware exists before waiting for it to be