linux-kernel - Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support, for TPM 2.0 firmware event log

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-ID: <20170131131351.akhihknjrqyoij6y@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:13:51 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Ken Goldman <kgold@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v9 2/2] tpm: add securityfs support, for
 TPM 2.0 firmware event log

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 04:22:45PM -0500, Ken Goldman wrote:
> > You do not need to send a new patch set version as long as this
> > one gets peer tested. And it needs to be tested without hacks
> > like plumbing TCPA with TPM 2.0 in QEMU. OF code paths needs to
> > be peer tested to be more specific.
> >
> > For me the code itself looks good but I simply cannot take it in
> > in the current situation.
> >
> > /Jarkko
> 
> Tested-by: Kenneth Goldman <kgold@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

Thanks. This explains it. I got Naynas response before I got this one.
That's why it went unnoticed.

/Jarkko