Re: [PATCH v3] tpm_crb: request and relinquish locality 0

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:00:41AM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:

> > Changing the return value to -EBUSY was a stupid mistake from my side.
> >
> > I'll try revise this a bit in a way that the API will allow positive
> > value for stating that the given locality has been already taking.
> 
> Is there a big performance hit with requesting and releasing locality?
> If instead it just released it when release_locality is called I think
> the changes are pretty minor.

If you can measure please let us know :)

This is all very old it may not actually make any sense..

.. and as I said earlier if we want to 'cache' the locality for
performance then the core code should do it.

I kinda thought the point of releasing the locality was to allow other
platform things to access the TPM, so I'm confused why TIS wouldn't
always release it as well..

Jason