From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: Question on Linux TSS architecture design (kernel vs. user space access) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 14:23:48 -0700 Message-ID: <20151222212348.GB9461@obsidianresearch.com> References: <9F48E1A823B03B4790B7E6E69430724DA58648F1@EXCH2010A.sit.fraunhofer.de> <201512171620.tBHGK3GE030569@d03av04.boulder.ibm.com> <9F48E1A823B03B4790B7E6E69430724DA586493C@EXCH2010A.sit.fraunhofer.de> <20151218105148.GA12882@intel.com> <20151218105323.GB12882@intel.com> <20151218114131.GA3287@intel.com> <9F48E1A823B03B4790B7E6E69430724DA586A57C@EXCH2010B.sit.fraunhofer.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9F48E1A823B03B4790B7E6E69430724DA586A57C-wI35/lLZEdRyXeJKmmMAp2SU2VBt9E6NG9Ur7JDdleE@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tpmdd-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: "Fuchs, Andreas" Cc: "tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org" , Ken Goldman List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 01:22:04PM +0000, Fuchs, Andreas wrote: > maintainers) if a 3-5 kLoC module would be generally acceptable for a > TPM-ResourceManager? I'd be alarmed if it is that much. The TPM format is very amenable to doing this, a well designed table driven approach should be quite small on the rpc handling side. The key is to not overthink/overdesign it too much. I have an entire tpm1.2 userpace in less than 2kloc, so I struggle to see why a simple resource manager would be so big. 1-2kloc is not a big deal kernel wise if it is well written and in the kernel style. Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------------