From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com (Jarkko Sakkinen) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 17:22:18 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance In-Reply-To: <20171123144742.GC8862@swastik> 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> Message-ID: <20171126152218.c5fsr7uhs3ipwwha@linux.intel.com> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org 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 -- 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