From: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Alexey Klimov <aklimov@redhat.com>,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca
Subject: Re: [PATCH REVIEW 2/2] tpm_tis: override durations for STM tpm with firmware 1.2.8.28
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2019 14:30:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190120213012.w2iyc26dcjk53g42@cantor> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190118145930.GE4080@linux.intel.com>
On Fri Jan 18 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:39:40PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>> Alexey was following the example of tpm_tis_update_timeouts() which
>> returns true if the timeouts were updated, and otherwise returns
>> false. The bool here makes sense to me, but what rc would you suggest
>> in this case?
>
>Maybe the pattern used there is not that great then.
>
>The callback should simply be update_durations(chip), and it would do
>whatever updates needed and either return zero or -errno. And of course
>update durations_adjusted flag because that is needed in sysfs.
>
>/Jarkko
Taking a quick look, they already track whether the adjustment
occurred in the tpm_chip struct, so that could be used instead for
what the bool return was being used for. I'll post a patch for the
timeout updates code, and work with Alexey to rework his patchset.
Regards,
Jerry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-21 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-14 13:21 [PATCH REVIEW 1/2] tpm: provide a way to override the chip returned durations Alexey Klimov
2018-12-14 13:21 ` [PATCH REVIEW 2/2] tpm_tis: override durations for STM tpm with firmware 1.2.8.28 Alexey Klimov
2019-01-03 13:14 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-01-14 19:39 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2019-01-18 14:59 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-01-20 21:30 ` Jerry Snitselaar [this message]
2019-01-21 12:29 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-01-03 13:05 ` [PATCH REVIEW 1/2] tpm: provide a way to override the chip returned durations Jarkko Sakkinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190120213012.w2iyc26dcjk53g42@cantor \
--to=jsnitsel@redhat.com \
--cc=aklimov@redhat.com \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).