Am 6. September 2016 12:47:37 GMT-07:00, schrieb Jason Gunthorpe <jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com>: >On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 12:39:46AM +0530, Nayna wrote: >> >>+int read_log_of(struct tpm_chip *chip); >> >>+#else >> >>+static inline int read_log_of(struct tpm_chip *chip) >> >>+{ >> >>+ return -1; >> >>+} >> >>+#endif >> > >> >Though shouldn't these two be ERRNOs of some kind? -ENODEV? >> >> Sure.. >> Was just trying to see possible errno. And here are some thoughts. >> >> >> #define EPERM 1 /* Operation not permitted */ >> #define ENODEV 19 /* No such device */ > >> Was thinking that since tpm device will still be present and its >either ACPI >> or OF way of accessing its properties, and one of them will return >this >> errno. So, assuming it is ACPI, that means no OF functions permitted. >So, >> how about using EPERM ? > >I'd choose ENODEV over EPERM, that is the usual way in the kernel to >signal 'probe failed'
Me too, EPERM sounds more like the caller is lacking priviledge to do so. > >Remember, which ever it is, it should not cause any messages to be >printed. > >Jason > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >_______________________________________________ >tpmdd-devel mailing list >tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel -- Sent from my mobile ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel