From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:33846 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751900AbdKZQhu (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:50 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAQGZ4EA096824 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:50 -0500 Received: from e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.108]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2efp7x1e85-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:50 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 16:37:47 -0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance From: Mimi Zohar To: Jarkko Sakkinen , Nayna Jain Cc: Alexander.Steffen@infineon.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterhuewe@gmx.de, tpmdd@selhorst.net, patrickc@us.ibm.com, "Safford, David (GE Global Research, US)" , leendert@paramecium.org Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:41 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20171126152218.c5fsr7uhs3ipwwha@linux.intel.com> References: <20171017203232.2262-1-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171017203232.2262-3-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5ef60315f2254b3b8bcc217a572280e5@infineon.com> <3ff12c6536de4379aa61cb09ebc9d105@infineon.com> <20171123144742.GC8862@swastik> <20171126152218.c5fsr7uhs3ipwwha@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1511714261.4361.13.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: [Cc'ing Dave and Leendeert] Hi Jarkko, > > It seems that the last byte was sent from the beginning (27084ef > > [PATCH] tpm: driver for next generation TPM chips,), does anyone > > remember the reason ? > > Sent from the beginning? I went through the commit logs to see if any of the patch descriptions have an explanation for sending the last byte separately. Based on commit 27084efee0c3 "[PATCH] tpm: driver for next generation TPM chips", it seems it's been there since the beginning. Dave, Leendert, Do either of you remember the reason for tpm_tis_send_data() sending the last byte separately? thanks, Mimi