Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>
wrote on 03/06/2016 07:28:16 AM:
> From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>
> To: Stefan Berger <stefanb-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
> Cc: tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> Date: 03/06/2016 07:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] ioctl API for vTPM
driver
>
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 02:11:03PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 02:05:37PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > 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.
Renamed it to vtpm_new_dev.
> > > 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.
I'll add some later today or tomorrow.
> > > 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.
Yes, it's there so that inside a container a device
with that major and minor number can be created and device cgroups be setup.
> >
> > 5. Is there any particular reason why 'tpm_dev_num' couldn't
simply be
> > 'dev_num'?
Renamed to 'tpm_num' Updated my git repo.
>
> I think you should still send a patch set after documentation has
been
> completed and we have addressed these items to the following mailing
> lists:
>
> * linux-kernel
> * linux-api
> * linux-doc
> * tpmdd
The whole patchset as 'v5' ?
>
> Now these patches have circled only in the tpmdd mailing list which
> is not sufficient. I just realized this recently that the relevant
> mailing lists were completely missing (while starting to write a
> test program).
>
> For patches up to TPM_CHIP_FLAG_VIRTUAL you could downloaded patches
> from my repository before posting the patch set since they include
> also my reviewed/tested-by's.
Ok, will sync.
Stefan
>
> Thanks.
>
> /Jarkko
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> tpmdd-devel mailing list
> tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
>