Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-14 Thread Jarkko Sakkinen
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 11:57:24PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 07:24:14AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > This should take care of it for all drivers including vtpm. > > > > > > https://github.com/jgunthorpe/linux/commits/for-jarkko > > > > > > At the very least th

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-13 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 07:24:14AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > This should take care of it for all drivers including vtpm. > > > > https://github.com/jgunthorpe/linux/commits/for-jarkko > > > > At the very least this turns silent use after free into a null pointer > > oops. > > > > We shou

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-13 Thread Jarkko Sakkinen
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:33:20PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:31:21PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > > > I'll send you something else that might work for vtpm...' > > > > The vtpm driver will introduce chip->priv, which will point to vtpm_dev. For > > this reason we

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-13 Thread Jarkko Sakkinen
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 05:04:30PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > This is a hold over from before the struct device conversion. > > - All prints should be using &chip->dev, which is the Linux > standard. This changes prints to use tpm0 as the device name, > not the PnP/etc ID. > - The few pla

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-12 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:31:21PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > > I'll send you something else that might work for vtpm...' > > The vtpm driver will introduce chip->priv, which will point to vtpm_dev. For > this reason we need to hold a reference to the vtpm_dev->dev in the > front end. This sho

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-12 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:31:21PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > The vtpm driver will introduce chip->priv, which will point to > vtpm_dev. For Why not just use chip->vendor.priv? Aka TPM_VPRIV > this reason we need to hold a reference to the vtpm_dev->dev in the > front end. Yes, but all drive

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tpm: Get rid of chip->pdev

2016-02-12 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 07:37:10PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: >Jason Gunthorpe wrote on 02/12/2016 >07:04:30 PM: >> >> This is a hold over from before the struct device conversion. >> >> - All prints should be using &chip->dev, which is the Linux >> standard. This ch