linux-integrity.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexey Klimov <aklimov@redhat.com>,
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca
Subject: Re: [PATCH REVIEW 2/2] tpm_tis: override durations for STM tpm with firmware 1.2.8.28
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 14:29:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190121122911.GB9423@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190120213012.w2iyc26dcjk53g42@cantor>

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 02:30:12PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> On Fri Jan 18 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:39:40PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > Alexey was following the example of tpm_tis_update_timeouts() which
> > > returns true if the timeouts were updated, and otherwise returns
> > > false. The bool here makes sense to me, but what rc would you suggest
> > > in this case?
> > 
> > Maybe the pattern used there is not that great then.
> > 
> > The callback should simply be update_durations(chip), and it would do
> > whatever updates needed and either return zero or -errno. And of course
> > update durations_adjusted flag because that is needed in sysfs.
> > 
> > /Jarkko
> 
> Taking a quick look, they already track whether the adjustment
> occurred in the tpm_chip struct, so that could be used instead for
> what the bool return was being used for. I'll post a patch for the
> timeout updates code, and work with Alexey to rework his patchset.

Awesome, thank you!

/Jarkko

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-21 12:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-14 13:21 [PATCH REVIEW 1/2] tpm: provide a way to override the chip returned durations Alexey Klimov
2018-12-14 13:21 ` [PATCH REVIEW 2/2] tpm_tis: override durations for STM tpm with firmware 1.2.8.28 Alexey Klimov
2019-01-03 13:14   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-01-14 19:39     ` Jerry Snitselaar
2019-01-18 14:59       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-01-20 21:30         ` Jerry Snitselaar
2019-01-21 12:29           ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2019-01-03 13:05 ` [PATCH REVIEW 1/2] tpm: provide a way to override the chip returned durations Jarkko Sakkinen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190121122911.GB9423@linux.intel.com \
    --to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=aklimov@redhat.com \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=jsnitsel@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).