[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19268.1291127520@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:32:00 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: kjhall@...ibm.com, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...ux-nfs.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
David Safford <safford@...son.ibm.com>,
Rajiv Andrade <srajiv@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1.5 3/5] key: add tpm_send command
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com> wrote:
> > +int tpm_send(u32 chip_num, void *cmd, size_t buflen)
>
> Hate to nit-pick, but any particular reason you're not following the
> rest of the file and using 'struct tpm_cmd_t *cmd' here?
Ummm... Something else I've just noticed...
static ssize_t tpm_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, const char *buf,
size_t bufsiz)
would suggest that buf is read-only, but tpm_transit() keeps casting it away,
and especially, casts it away before passing it to chip->vendor.recv()...
This would seem to indicate a logic error somewhere.
Certainly, tpm_atml_recv() modifies the buffer it is given to...
I suspect the argument and reply buffer pointers should be passed separately.
David
--
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