From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753507Ab2IGRh5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:37:57 -0400 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.139]:42025 "EHLO e9.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751977Ab2IGRhu (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:37:50 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:38:09 -0500 From: Kent Yoder To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Ashley Lai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, adlai@us.ibm.com, James Morris Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] drivers/char/tpm: Add new device driver to support IBM vTPM Message-ID: <20120907173809.GA19704@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1344987282.4430.26.camel@footlong> <1345670263.25124.7.camel@footlong> <20120822214217.GB13519@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1346816407.2257.37.camel@pasglop> <20120905154644.GA14925@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1346879505.19098.3.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1346879505.19098.3.camel@pasglop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12090717-7182-0000-0000-000002898409 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > James did accept my pull request, so these are already in > > security-next... > > For the driver itself, it's not a big issue (though I did found issue > while reviewing it so it will need another round of updates). For the > code that changes arch/powerpc, especially prom_init.c, that stuff must > at the very least be acked by me (or the acting powerpc person if I'm > away) if it's going to go via a different tree. Sorry about that. Hopefully there won't be any changes there and we can amend with your ack. As for the driver updates, I'd hate to see everyone else's code in the pull request get delayed yet again. James, will it be ok to apply the update on top of security-next? Thanks, Kent > Cheers, > Ben. >