From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christophe Ricard <christophe.ricard@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:28:34 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 07/25] tpm: tpm_tis_i2c: Drop unnecessary
	methods
In-Reply-To: <CAPnjgZ1eoBivzmej12R-hT2O63Dz2zGeHGmR7rPxw549Y9wCyg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1439304497-10081-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org>
 <1439304497-10081-8-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org>
 <55CA6D5D.6070505@gmail.com>
 <CAPnjgZ1eoBivzmej12R-hT2O63Dz2zGeHGmR7rPxw549Y9wCyg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <55CCFDF2.3050104@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Simon,

On 13/08/2015 03:30, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> On 11 August 2015 at 15:47, christophe.ricard
> <christophe.ricard@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> As per my comment on patch 6, i would disagree as well on this one.
>> It tpm_vendor_specific structure is convenient for ST33ZP24 for example.
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Christophe
>>
> As things stand they are only used in one place. I think we should
> work out the best uclass API for the TPM and then go with that.
I agree with that.
How do you want to proceed ? Do you agree to integrate the results of 
our exchanges for a new round ?

[...]

Best Regards
Christophe