[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190208111442.GA11755@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 13:14:42 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Alexander Steffen <Alexander.Steffen@...ineon.com>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Huewe <PeterHuewe@....de>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>,
Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/16] Remove nested TPM operations
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 08:51:15PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > > + rc = 0;
> > > if (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ)
> > > goto out_recv;
> > What why?
>
>
> This fix seems to only be necessary when bisecting. You may want to apply
> it!
I don't want to apply it because I don't understand why it would
be needed. Can you give a short explanation?
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists