From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753038AbcKPF2s (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:28:48 -0500
Received: from quartz.orcorp.ca ([184.70.90.242]:44087 "EHLO quartz.orcorp.ca"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1750806AbcKPF2p (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:28:45 -0500
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:28:32 -0700
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
        Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@selhorst.net>,
        Christophe Ricard <christophe.ricard@gmail.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted
Message-ID: <20161116052832.GB6044@obsidianresearch.com>
References: <20161114234500.24839-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20161115043001.GA22482@obsidianresearch.com>
 <20161115051106.u2xoduwf2kpcznv3@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161115051106.u2xoduwf2kpcznv3@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:11:54PM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:

> How strong is your opposition here? I do not see any exceptional damage
> done but see some subtle but still significant benefits.

It seems OK, but I never like seeing locking made less clear - this
should be manageable, and there isn't a performance concern with tpm
either..

Jason