Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted

Path	csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted
Date	Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:00:02 +0100
Message-ID	<sEhlo-Bi-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<sDzaF-5oL-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDDHj-8vG-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDEk1-yW-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <sE0Xf-70B-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Extloop1	1
X-Ironport-Av	E=Sophos;i="5.31,650,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="1069507741"
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition	inline
Organization	Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
User-Agent	Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-08-21)
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
List-ID	<linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	14
X-Original-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>
X-Original-Date	Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:54:12 -0800
X-Original-Message-ID	<20161116225412.gzvw7f5snnovk7na@intel.com>
X-Original-References	<20161114234500.24839-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20161115043001.GA22482@obsidianresearch.com> <20161115051106.u2xoduwf2kpcznv3@intel.com> <20161116052832.GB6044@obsidianresearch.com>
X-Original-Sender	linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Xref	csiph.com linux.kernel:1523951

Show key headers only | View raw

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:28:32PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> 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..

OK good to hear. I'm using this as part of my RM patch set. Just wanted
to get some feedback for this patch. Not for the next rel.

/Jarkko

Thread

[PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-11-15 00:50 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> - 2016-11-15 05:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-11-15 06:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> - 2016-11-16 06:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and chip->duration_adjusted Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-11-17 00:00 +0100
  Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and  chip->duration_adjusted Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-17 11:50 +0100
    Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: drop chip->is_open and  chip->duration_adjusted Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-11-17 18:40 +0100

csiph-web