From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jgg@ziepe.ca (Jason Gunthorpe) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 09:04:04 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v2] tpm: Move Linux RNG connection to hwrng In-Reply-To: References: <20171031200503.GC18578@ziepe.ca> <20171105110506.usxmuzrvcjvxahr6@linux.intel.com> <20171106022704.GD26011@ziepe.ca> Message-ID: <20171107160404.GG21466@ziepe.ca> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:50:44AM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote: > I am assuming you are talking about the following patches - using > struct tpm_chip instead of chip number and this patch. yes > I won't be able to test if struct tpm_chip usage as I don't have > multiple tpm hw in one machine. In case of tpm rng changes I can test > only the lifecycle of tpm rng device. Is that enough? I feel my test > will be limited. Please provide your thoughts on this. That is certainly better than no testing. 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