On 12/22/2015 4:23 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > I'd be alarmed if it is that much. The TPM format is very amenable to > doing this, a well designed table driven approach should be quite > small on the rpc handling side. The key is to not overthink/overdesign > it too much.
Let's expand on "alarmed". If that just means you're surprised, OK. If it means the code will be rejected based solely on the size, please tell us now. > I have an entire tpm1.2 userpace in less than 2kloc, so I struggle to > see why a simple resource manager would be so big. > > 1-2kloc is not a big deal kernel wise if it is well written and in the > kernel style. Similar question. Let's assume it's 5 kloc, or even more. Can it be accepted or not? I don't want to go down the TPM 1.2 path, where IBM funded several projects and they were all rejected, not after any technical evaluation, but simply based on LOC. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
