[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1384645999.7518.46.camel@fishsauce>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 17:53:19 -0600
From: Ashley Lai <adlai@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
Cc: tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH 2/5 v2] tpm: Pull everything related to
sysfs into tpm-sysfs.c
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..3bcfed0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@
> + * Copyright (C) 2013 Obsidian Reearch Corp
Typo Research?
> + * Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
> + *
> +#include "tpm.h"
> +
> +/* XXX for now this helper is duplicated in tpm.c */
I think you mean this is duplicated in tpm-interface.c. Is there a
reason why we cannot add this to tpm.h to avoid this duplication?
> +static ssize_t transmit_cmd(struct tpm_chip *chip, struct tpm_cmd_t *cmd,
> + int len, const char *desc)
> +{
> +static ssize_t pubek_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> + char *buf)
Most of the functions in this file are moved from tpm-interface.c
without any modification to the code. Why do we need to change the
function names in this file? Unless there is a good reason for it
otherwise I would prefer to keep the same function names. This is for
easy maintaining (for me at least :)) in case there are issues in the
future and we need to go back we can easily find out where they came
from.
Thanks,
--Ashley Lai
--
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