From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/9] tpm: replace dynamically allocated bios_dir with a static array Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 12:38:13 -0700 Message-ID: <20161125193813.GE16504@obsidianresearch.com> References: <1479117656-12403-1-git-send-email-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1479117656-12403-4-git-send-email-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20161122112333.7ootyrbssd6pkrjb@intel.com> <20161122165856.GD3956@obsidianresearch.com> <20161124135723.kfafipftppjyr5ip@intel.com> <20161124165313.GB4930@obsidianresearch.com> <20161125080838.mpzflnz7epo6wv6g@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161125080838.mpzflnz7epo6wv6g@intel.com> Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: Nayna Jain , tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, peterhuewe@gmx.de, tpmdd@selhorst.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 10:08:38AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > This is no good at this point in the series - we need the ENODEV > > detection in tpm_chip_register() from the 'Fix handle of missing event > > log' moved into this patch, because it now returns ENODEV due to > > sercurityfs > > Sure it would be cleaner but not really necessary. Do you really think > this is mandatory? No matter how I reorder patches this will require > time and effort to fix various merge conflicts because of the replacemnt > of event log. After that I have to test everything. Well, once you started editing patches to fix them you should make them fully correct so bisection works. If you applied the patch I gave you on top of the tree then I would have said to leave it... > The commit message otherwise great except for the short summary, which > is now fixed. It is good now Jason