From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tpm: Move Linux RNG connection to hwrng Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 09:04:04 -0700 Message-ID: <20171107160404.GG21466@ziepe.ca> References: <20171031200503.GC18578@ziepe.ca> <20171105110506.usxmuzrvcjvxahr6@linux.intel.com> <20171106022704.GD26011@ziepe.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen , Stefan Berger , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , Herbert Xu , Dmitry Kasatkin , open list , "open list:INTEGRITY MEASUREMENT ARCHITECTURE (IMA)" , "open list:KEYS-TRUSTED" , "open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE" , James Morris , Matt Mackall , David Safford , Mimi Zohar , "Serge E. Hallyn" To: PrasannaKumar Muralidharan Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:50:44AM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan wrote: > I am assuming you are talking about the following patches - using > struct tpm_chip instead of chip number and this patch. yes > I won't be able to test if struct tpm_chip usage as I don't have > multiple tpm hw in one machine. In case of tpm rng changes I can test > only the lifecycle of tpm rng device. Is that enough? I feel my test > will be limited. Please provide your thoughts on this. That is certainly better than no testing. Jason