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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:41 -0500
From:   Mimi Zohar <>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <>,
        Nayna Jain <>
        "Safford, David (GE Global Research, US)" <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send()

[Cc'ing Dave and Leendeert]

Hi Jarkko,

> > It seems that the last byte was sent from the beginning (27084ef
> > [PATCH] tpm: driver for next generation TPM chips,), does anyone
> > remember the reason ?
> Sent from the beginning?

I went through the commit logs to see if any of the patch descriptions
have an explanation for sending the last byte separately. Based on
commit 27084efee0c3 "[PATCH] tpm: driver for next generation TPM
chips", it seems it's been there since the beginning.

Dave, Leendert, Do either of you remember the reason for
tpm_tis_send_data() sending the last byte separately?



Powered by blists - more mailing lists