lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:30:42 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <>
To:     James Bottomley <>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <>,
        open list <>,,
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH RFC v4 4/5] tpm: split out tpm-dev.c into
 tpm-dev.c and tpm-common-dev.c

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 02:28:23PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-01-23 at 09:47 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 01:44:32AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > From: James Bottomley <>
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley
> > > <>
> > 
> > I really think we should not use the ugly read/write interface for 
> > any new things.
> The R/W interface is needed for backward compat, so we don't really
> have a choice (well, it could go in for long term deprecation, but I
> found in SCSI that "long term" == "never").  I think no-one objects to
> the ioctl interface ... it's just no-one feels strongly enough to build
> and test it.  I'm sure if you send patches, Jarkko will include them.
> James

I feel that it is incorrect to speak backwards compatibility because we
do no touch /dev/tpm0.

We can only speak about backwards compatibility only after the API for
tpms0 is in a kernel release. If someone uses that device, she must know
the constraints that it has.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists