Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753482AbdLUWbF (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Dec 2017 17:31:05 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f179.google.com ([209.85.128.179]:42847 "EHLO mail-wr0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751256AbdLUWbA (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Dec 2017 17:31:00 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBoulICg9qc41ylNtt6agwsKxE1A57xOVvaRsXtdvIvcHV0kPvQjcFMj5eh3E+7YFrp00B8AUrw== Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 15:30:49 -0700 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: "Shaikh, Azhar" Cc: "jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com" , "javierm@redhat.com" , "peterhuewe@gmx.de" , "linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Fix the driver cleanup code Message-ID: <20171221223049.GJ20015@ziepe.ca> References: <1513887422-123222-1-git-send-email-azhar.shaikh@intel.com> <20171221202652.GH20015@ziepe.ca> <5FFFAD06ADE1CA4381B3F0F7C6AF5828989144@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> <20171221203853.GI20015@ziepe.ca> <5FFFAD06ADE1CA4381B3F0F7C6AF582898918B@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5FFFAD06ADE1CA4381B3F0F7C6AF582898918B@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 523 Lines: 19 On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 09:54:26PM +0000, Shaikh, Azhar wrote: > Yes, I checked this part. What I was referring to is any other > callback function similar to clk_enable if gets added in future and > then needs to Access ops even after it is set to NULL... You can't call callback functions after tpm_unregister_chip, it isn't allowed. This is a special case where we know the specific implementation of this specific callback is OK. > But yes I get your point now. > > So do you mean something like this? Yes Jason