[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cddf0b42-c69f-c110-9543-e16d30c9927a@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2021 08:08:27 -0400
From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: peterhuewe@....de, jgg@...pe.ca, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>,
George Wilson <gcwilson@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: ibmvtpm: Rename tpm_process_cmd to tpm_status
and define flag
On 8/6/21 7:25 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 05:52:55PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
>> From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
>>
>> Rename the field tpm_processing_cmd to tpm_status in ibmvtpm_dev and set
>> the TPM_STATUS_BUSY flag while the vTPM is busy processing a command.
>>
>> Fixes: 6674ff145eef ("tpm_ibmvtpm: properly handle interrupted packet receptions")
>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
>> Cc: Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>
>> Cc: George Wilson <gcwilson@...ux.ibm.com>
> Please put the bug fix first because otherwise it will be dependent of this
> patch, which is bad thing when it comes to backporting.
Yes, and that's why I have this one here also with a Fix tag. I
basically don't want to logically '&' with the 'true' flag but want this
TPM_STATUS_BUSY flag first.
Stefan
>
> /Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists