From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kent Yoder Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] add tpm_xenu.ko: Xen Virtual TPM frontend driver Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:28:35 -0600 Message-ID: <20121108152835.GA28612@ennui.austin.ibm.com> References: <1352128197-1539-1-git-send-email-matthew.fioravante@jhuapl.edu> <20121107144625.GA14628@ennui.austin.ibm.com> <509AA501.1090701@jhuapl.edu> <509B78AC02000078000A723C@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <509B78AC02000078000A723C@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Matthew Fioravante , "jeremy@goop.org" , "tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "konrad.wilk@oracle.com" , "mail@srajiv.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:17:32AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 07.11.12 at 19:14, Matthew Fioravante wrote: > > On 11/07/2012 09:46 AM, Kent Yoder wrote: > >>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h > >>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h > >>> @@ -130,6 +130,9 @@ struct tpm_chip { > >>> > >>> struct list_head list; > >>> void (*release) (struct device *); > >>> +#if CONFIG_XEN > >>> + void *priv; > >>> +#endif > >> Can you use the chip->vendor.data pointer here instead? tpm_ibmvtpm is > >> already using that as a priv pointer. I should probably change that name > >> to make it more obvious what that's used for. > > That makes more sense. I'm guessing your data pointer didn't exist > > during the 2.6.18 kernel which is why they added their own priv pointer. > > It got introduced with 3.7-rc. > > >>> @@ -310,6 +313,18 @@ struct tpm_cmd_t { > >>> > >>> ssize_t tpm_getcap(struct device *, __be32, cap_t *, const char *); > >>> > >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_XEN > >>> +static inline void *chip_get_private(const struct tpm_chip *chip) > >>> +{ > >>> + return chip->priv; > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +static inline void chip_set_private(struct tpm_chip *chip, void *priv) > >>> +{ > >>> + chip->priv = priv; > >>> +} > >>> +#endif > >> Can you put these in tpm_vtpm.c please? One less #define. :-) > > Agreed, I'd rather not have to modify your shared tpm.h interface at all. > > Either such accessors should be defined here, for everyone to > use (and tpm_ibmvtpm.c get changed accordingly), or the Xen > code should access the field without wrappers too (for consistency). Agreed. I'll update tpm_ibmvtpm. Kent > > Jan >