From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com (Jason Gunthorpe) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 14:17:44 -0600 Subject: [PATCH v2] tpm: use struct tpm_chip for tpm_chip_find_get() In-Reply-To: <20171025200746.svsraubdotjyzt2i@linux.intel.com> References: <20171025115508.5682-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20171025193452.d4qa4dhacfgqejk7@linux.intel.com> <20171025194633.GB998@obsidianresearch.com> <20171025200746.svsraubdotjyzt2i@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <20171025201744.GB2815@obsidianresearch.com> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:07:46PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > The id has a nice feature that it is unique for one boot cycle you can > even try to get a chip that has been deleted. It has the most stable > properties in the long run. It isn't unique, we can re-use ids them via idr_alloc(). We should never use index inside the kernel. > Address is a reusable identifier in one boot cycle. It is invalid to pass in a chip for which the caller does not hold a kref, so address is the safest argument. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html