[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200319191211.GA23430@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:12:11 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: George Wilson <gcwilson@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>,
Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linh Pham <phaml@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tpm: ibmvtpm: retry on H_CLOSED in tpm_ibmvtpm_send()
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 07:35:42PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 10:43:18PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > static const char tpm_ibmvtpm_driver_name[] = "tpm_ibmvtpm";
> > >
> > > static const struct vio_device_id tpm_ibmvtpm_device_table[] = {
> > > @@ -147,6 +149,7 @@ static int tpm_ibmvtpm_send(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t count)
> > > {
> > > struct ibmvtpm_dev *ibmvtpm = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
> > > int rc, sig;
> > > + bool retry = true;
> >
> > Cosmetic: would be nice to have inits when possible in reverse
> > Christmas tree order i.e.
> >
> > struct ibmvtpm_dev *ibmvtpm = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
> > bool retry = true;
> > int rc, sig;
> >
> > It is way more pleasing for the eye when you have to read the source
> > code.
>
> I thought only netdev insisted on that :O
x86 seems to prefer too and I agree with the idea. But as I said only
that it would be nice.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists