On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 05:24:11PM -0700, Andrey Pronin wrote: > The only two things that bother me with such approach are > (1) whatever names I pick for the new set of functions, they > will be similar to and thus might be confused with the > original tpm_tis_read/writeXX;
tpm_tis_helper_read16 ? > (2) these functions are phy-specific, so possibly it's better > to create tpm_tis_spi.h and put them there with proper > name prefixes. And then use in tpm_tis_spi and cr50_spi. No, they are generic to any tis phy that implements read only through read_bytes. (Honestly, I'm not sure we made the best choice here having phy functions for all the versions, we are not that performance sensitive, just getting rid of everything but read_bytes from the phy_ops would probably also be a reasonable thing to do.) Jason
