On Saturday 18 April 2015 20:49:03 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 11:36:53AM +0200, Javier González wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> A: No.
> Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
>
> http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
>
> > We have discussed and implemented an in-kernel interface for the driver.
> > However, we need to agree on that interface with the kernel submodules that
> > can be interested in using it (e.g., IMA, keyring). We though it was easier
> > to have a framework in place before taking this space. This makes sense
> > since a TEE driver will be, as for today, mostly used by user space.
> > applications.
>
> No, please provide a "real" solution, just providing a framework that no
> one uses means that I get to delete it from the kernel tree the next
> release, and I doubt you want that
>
> Please do all of the work here, as odds are, what you need in the end
> will be different from what you have proposed here.
I guess an alternative would be to remove all the unused infrastructure
code and only provide a user space interface for the features that
op_tee requires, but no optional user interfaces or in-kernel interfaces.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
