From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:45018 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752209AbdKZPWX (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Nov 2017 10:22:23 -0500 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 17:22:18 +0200 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Nayna Jain Cc: Alexander.Steffen@infineon.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterhuewe@gmx.de, tpmdd@selhorst.net, patrickc@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance Message-ID: <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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20171123144742.GC8862@swastik> Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 08:17:42PM +0530, Nayna Jain wrote: > Yeah, you are right, the first version of this patch sent all the > bytes together, but after hearing ddwg inputs, i.e. "The last byte was > introduced for error checking purposes (history).", I reverted back to > original to be safe. What does that mean ie error checking purposes? > 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? /Jarkko