On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 03:28:53PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 04:34:21PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 09:04:04AM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:50:44AM +0530, PrasannaKumar Muralidharan > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I am assuming you are talking about the following patches - using > > > > struct tpm_chip instead of chip number and this patch. > > > > > > yes > > > > > > > I won't be able to test if struct tpm_chip usage as I don't have > > > > multiple tpm hw in one machine. In case of tpm rng changes I can test > > > > only the lifecycle of tpm rng device. Is that enough? I feel my test > > > > will be limited. Please provide your thoughts on this. > > > > > > That is certainly better than no testing. > > > > > > Jason > > > > WFM too. > > > > Tested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com> > > > > /Jarkko > > I applied these commits. Please check that everything is correct as > I had to do manual work with the 2nd commit. > > /Jarkko
At least signed-off-by from PrassanaKumar is missing from the 2nd commit. I'll add it. /Jarkko
