[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <06473b24-7c59-9405-bbe0-8d30b3450391@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 07:05:26 -0500
From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.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 2/8/19 6:14 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> 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?
See my comment on [PATCH v11 08/16]. It needs to be added in that patch
since otherwise rc holds a non-zero value on function exit, which is
wrong at that point.
>
> /Jarkko
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists