On 11.01.22 21:29, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 11/01/2022 15:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> diff --git a/tpm_tis.c b/tpm_tis.c
>> index 477f555..abea7a1 100644
>> --- a/tpm_tis.c
>> +++ b/tpm_tis.c
>> @@ -1093,6 +1097,23 @@ ssize_t tpm_getcap(struct tpm_chip *chip, uint32_t subcap_id, cap_t *cap,
>>           return rc;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static void shutdown_tpm_tis(struct tpm_chip* tpm){
> 
> Style, as you're moving it.  Also in the function.
> 
>> @@ -1360,6 +1369,35 @@ int tpm_tis_posix_fstat(int fd, struct stat* buf)
>>      return 0;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static struct file_ops tpm_tis_ops = {
>> +    .name = "tpm_tis",
>> +    .read = tpm_tis_posix_read,
>> +    .write = tpm_tis_posix_write,
>> +    .lseek = lseek_default,
>> +    .close = tpm_tis_close,
>> +    .fstat = tpm_tis_posix_fstat,
>> +};
>> +
>> +int tpm_tis_open(struct tpm_chip* tpm)
> 
> Style.

Ah, yes I should have corrected this while moving the function.

> 
>> +{
>> +   struct file *file;
>> +   static unsigned int ftype_tis;
>> +
>> +   /* Silently prevent multiple opens */
>> +   if(tpm->fd != -1) {
>> +      return tpm->fd;
>> +   }
> 
> Another WTF moment.  We silently swallow multiple open()s, but don't
> refcout close()s ?
> 
> This cannot be correct, or sensible, behaviour.
> 
> Jason/Daniel - thoughts?

I just moved the function, but I can change this, of course.


Juergen