[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A36C04B.6070204@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:42:35 -0300
From: Rajiv Andrade <srajiv@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
CC: "dds (☕)" <dds@...gle.com>,
seiji.munetoh@...il.com, tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Shahbaz Khan <shaz.linux@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] TPM drivers support and Linux Integrity Module
for 2.6.30
> 2- Forget manufacturer_id and base the decision on the PNP_ID as david
> suggested. I previously considered it but since it would end up in
> modifying tpm_tis_init() prototype (struct device * to struct pnp_dev *)
> and then wouldn't work when loading as a module with force option on, so
> I moved to the manufacturer_id approach.
>
> I'll get back to #2 meanwhile and post the patch, seems not hard to
> accomplish though..
>
Yes, it wasn't hard, at all, just get the id with to_pnp_dev(dev)->id.
However, the chip is buggy, there's no reason to make a compliant
upstream code modify its behavior just due an 'exception' for a not
compliant hardware.
No need to worry about it too though, the workaround is available as I
pointed earlier (Seiji's)...
Thanks,
Rajiv
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists