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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:41 -0500 From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>, Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Alexander.Steffen@...ineon.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterhuewe@....de, tpmdd@...horst.net, patrickc@...ibm.com, "Safford, David (GE Global Research, US)" <david.safford@...com>, leendert@...amecium.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] tpm: ignore burstcount to improve tpm_tis send() performance [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? thanks, Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists