[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191112201716.GA12340@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 22:17:16 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: question about setting TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ in tpm_tis_core_init
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 08:28:57AM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> I set this flag for the TIS because it wasn't set anywhere else.
> tpm_tis_send() wouldn't set the flag but go via the path:
>
> if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ) || priv->irq_tested)
>
> return tpm_tis_send_main(chip, buf, len);
Wondering why this isn't just "if (priv->irq_tested)"? Isn't that the
whole point. The tail is the test part e.g. should be executed when
IRQ testing is done.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists