[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160903062221.GA2061@intel.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 09:22:22 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
Cc: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@...horst.net>,
"moderated list:TPM DEVICE DRIVER"
<tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: move struct tpm_class_ops to drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 04:45:31PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 01:35:22AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 04:11:22PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 12:48:03AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > > The struct tpm_class_ops is not used outside the TPM driver. Thus,
> > > > it can be safely move to drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h.
> > >
> > > No, this is the wrong direction.
> > >
> > > The goal is to make things more like other subsystems, so we should be
> > > moving struct tpm_chip into the public header, and that requires ops
> > > to be in the public header.
> > >
> > > This is why I put ops here in the first place.
> >
> > I'm OK with it as long as you explain why this is necessary. I see no
> > use for them outside the TPM subsystem.
>
> That is because the users out side the subsystem are Doing it Wrong.
>
> eg this:
>
> extern int tpm_is_tpm2(u32 chip_num);
>
> Should be:
>
> extern int tpm_is_tpm2(struct tpm_chip *chip);
>
> And same for all other examples.
>
> The 'chip_num' thing is bonkers.
OK, how would one get the chip instance?
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists