On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 02:04:54PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> On Mon Sep 16 19, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > On Mon Sep 16 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > tpm_send() does not give anymore the result back to the caller. This
> > > would require another memcpy(), which kind of tells that the
On Mon Sep 16 19, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
On Mon Sep 16 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
tpm_send() does not give anymore the result back to the caller. This
would require another memcpy(), which kind of tells that the whole
approach is somewhat broken. Instead, as Mimi suggested, this commit
just
On Mon Sep 16 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
tpm_send() does not give anymore the result back to the caller. This
would require another memcpy(), which kind of tells that the whole
approach is somewhat broken. Instead, as Mimi suggested, this commit
just wraps the data to the tpm_buf, and thus the
tpm_send() does not give anymore the result back to the caller. This
would require another memcpy(), which kind of tells that the whole
approach is somewhat broken. Instead, as Mimi suggested, this commit
just wraps the data to the tpm_buf, and thus the result will not go to
the garbage.
4 matches
Mail list logo