From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nayna Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] tpm: move event log init functions to tpm_eventlog_init.c Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 22:20:14 +0530 Message-ID: <58371A46.3090400@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1479922057-8752-1-git-send-email-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1479922057-8752-2-git-send-email-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20161123193830.GB13927@obsidianresearch.com> <58369E3F.40509@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20161124164331.GA4930@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20161124164331.GA4930@obsidianresearch.com> Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, peterhuewe@gmx.de, tpmdd@selhorst.net, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On 11/24/2016 10:13 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0530, Nayna wrote: > >>>> Since the initialization functions are common with the TPM 2.0 event >>>> log support, this patch splits tpm_eventlog.c to have only TPM 1.2 >>>> event log parsing logic and moves the init functions into >>>> tpm_eventlog_init.c. >>> >>> I think I'd rather see a tpm_eventlog1.c/tpm_eventlog2.c than this >>> _init thing.. >> >> Do you mean tpm_eventlog1.c for TPM 1.2 and tpm_eventlog2.c for TPM 2.0 >> event log specific parsing ? >> >> And if so, then which one should have the common functions for TPM 1.2 and >> TPM 2.0? > > Leave them in tpm_eventlog.c .. Sure. I am fine with that. I just feel that it bit of mixed up the scope of tpm_eventlog.c file, where it now also refers to TPM2, but have corresponding seq functions in separate file. Thanks & Regards, - Nayna > > Jason >