From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] tpm: remove chip_num parameter from
 in-kernel API
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:11:23 +0200
Message-ID: <20171025191123.4uqh6epwhak6hqp5@linux.intel.com>
References: <20171023123817.18559-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <cbcb78c6-fa36-32d3-891e-96544875d97c@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20171023163139.GA17394@obsidianresearch.com>
 <20171024154440.3jeupmus43jcgbbz@linux.intel.com>
 <CANc+2y4TbkfPT3d_sBd0MbE7ZJ4F7Sfsfvdv9V6=63=tRpWn4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171024162359.tf5xulhlhokmuxh5@linux.intel.com>
 <CANc+2y4vtr+kbhC_7Rv=rHA2LgEVBHLFEu+DYYK1UmpU63PCgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171024182235.d7b3oajc5zcjs57v@linux.intel.com>
 <CANc+2y4BtQGqtC8RJL1Srrz_kWwhyveV3HBpfO1kikFj+0mHaA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        "open list:INTEGRITY MEASUREMENT ARCHITECTURE IMA"
        <linux-ima-user@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        "moderated list:TPM DEVICE DRIVER"
        <tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        "open list:KEYS-TRUSTED" <keyrings@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
        <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
        Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
        "open list:INTEGRITY MEASUREMENT ARCHITECTURE IMA"
To: PrasannaKumar Muralidharan <prasannatsmkumar@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANc+2y4BtQGqtC8RJL1Srrz_kWwhyveV3HBpfO1kikFj+0mHaA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 08:21:16PM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote:
> >> > 2. Moving struct tpm_rng to the TPM client is architecturally
> >> >    uacceptable.
> >>
> >> As there was no response to the patch there is no way to know whether
> >> it is acceptable or not.
> >
> > I like the idea of removing the tpm rng driver as discussed in other
> > emails in this thread.
> 
> Thank you.

No, thank you.

I didn't first understand the big idea and only looked at the code
change per se. I apologize for that.

The problem that you went to solve was real and it led to a properly
implemented solution. You were not late from the party. Jason's code
change is derivative work of your code change. That's why his code
change has also your signed-off-by.

Thanks for doing awesome work :-)

/Jarkko