[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171025185817.hoalqzud3646yuy7@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:58:17 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: PrasannaKumar Muralidharan <prasannatsmkumar@...il.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
"open list:KEYS-TRUSTED" <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
David Safford <safford@...ibm.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Move Linux RNG connection to hwrng
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 08:15:09PM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote:
> > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TPM))
> > + return 0;
>
> Can #ifndef CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TPM be used instead? That way an if
> condition can be avoided.
Nope. There is no reason to avoid the if-condition. Compiler will take
care of it. IS_ENABLED() macro is available just for the purpose Jason
is using it.
> > + char tpm_hwrng_name[64];
> > + struct hwrng tpm_hwrng;
> > +
>
> Can this also be put inside the #ifdef?
Yes. It should be inside #ifdef.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists