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
