From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Sakkinen Subject: ioctl API for vTPM driver Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 14:05:37 +0200 Message-ID: <20160306120537.GA22702@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tpmdd-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Stefan Berger Cc: tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Hi Some follow-up question that have popped up while I've started to write a test program for this feature mainly about ioctl API. It's better to be extremly cautious here because we will be stuck with this ioctl forever. 1. Why the ioctl name is VTPM_NEW_DEV but the struct name is vtpm_new_pair? It would be better if they both were either VTPM_NEW_DEV and vtpm_new_dev or alternatively VTPM_NEW_PAIR and vtpm_new_pair. 2. Is 'pair' or 'tuple' a better term? 3. Where is the documentation for the ioctl? I don't think I can merge this to my next branch before it exists. 4. I have forgotten why the major and minor numbers were returned. My guess is that they were returned so that a container could replicate the device? This is one reason why documentation is mandatory. /Jarkko ------------------------------------------------------------------------------