Re: ioctl API for vTPM driver

[Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>]

On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 02:05:37PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Some follow-up question that have popped up while I've started to
> write a test program for this feature mainly about ioctl API.  It's
> better to be extremly cautious here because we will be stuck with this
> ioctl forever.
> 
> 1. Why the ioctl name is VTPM_NEW_DEV but the struct name is
>    vtpm_new_pair? It would be better if they both were either
>    VTPM_NEW_DEV and vtpm_new_dev or alternatively VTPM_NEW_PAIR
>    and vtpm_new_pair.
> 2. Is 'pair' or 'tuple' a better term?
> 3. Where is the documentation for the ioctl? I don't think I can
>    merge this to my next branch before it exists.
> 4. I have forgotten why the major and minor numbers were returned.
>    My guess is that they were returned so that a container could
>    replicate the device? This is one reason why documentation is
>    mandatory.

5. Is there any particular reason why 'tpm_dev_num' couldn't simply be
   'dev_num'?

/Jarkko

------------------------------------------------------------------------------