On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 08:35:55PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed Oct 25, 2023 at 12:03 PM EEST, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <[email protected]> > > On Wed, 2023-10-25 at 02:03 -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <[email protected]> > > > > Thanks I'll add it to the next round. > > For the tpm_buf_read(), I was thinking along the lines of: > > /** > * tpm_buf_read() - Read from a TPM buffer > * @buf: &tpm_buf instance > * @pos: position within the buffer > * @count: the number of bytes to read > * @output: the output buffer > * > * Read bytes from a TPM buffer, and update the position. Returns false when > the > * amount of bytes requested would overflow the buffer, which is expected to > * only happen in the case of hardware failure. > */ > static bool tpm_buf_read(const struct tpm_buf *buf, off_t *pos, size_t count, > void *output) > { > off_t next = *pos + count; > > if (next >= buf->length) { > pr_warn("%s: %lu >= %lu\n", __func__, next, *offset); > return false; > } > > memcpy(output, &buf->data[*pos], count); > *offset = next; > return true; > } > > BR, Jarkko >
Then the callers will check, and return -EIO?
