On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:06:20AM +0530, Nayna wrote: > > rc = tpm_bios_log_setup(chip); > >- if (rc == -ENODEV) > >+ if (rc != 0 && rc != -ENODEV) > > return rc; > > This will return in case of -EFAULT as well, where the check is that log is > already initialized. Do we want to fail the probe here as well ? > > -EFAULT is returned from tpm_read_log() as below:
That is fine, we should never read the log twice. > >index fb603a74cbd29e..2a15b866ac257a 100644 > >+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_eventlog.c > >@@ -377,14 +377,21 @@ static int tpm_read_log(struct tpm_chip *chip) > > } > > > > rc = tpm_read_log_acpi(chip); > > This is to understand.. > It can return -ENOMEM error here, contd below... > > >- if ((rc == 0) || (rc == -ENOMEM)) > >+ if (rc != -ENODEV) > > return rc; > > > >- rc = tpm_read_log_of(chip); > >- > >- return rc; > >+ return tpm_read_log_of(chip); > > So, in ACPI if -ENOMEM error is returned, it will continue to > tpm_read_log_of(chip), which will return -ENODEV. So, -ENOMEM error is now > masked with -ENODEV error. No, if acpi is -ENOMEM then 'if (rc != -ENODEV)' is true and it returns -ENOMEM. > > sizep = of_get_property(np, "linux,sml-size", NULL); > >- if (sizep == NULL) > >+ basep = of_get_property(np, "linux,sml-base", NULL); > >+ if (sizep == NULL && basep == NULL) > >+ return -ENODEV; > >+ if (sizep == NULL || basep == NULL) > > return -EIO; > > To confirm my understanding, > > For -ENODEV, it means that both properties are not supported, so event log > is not supported. Yes > For -EIO , it means that event log is supported but there is some failure in > getting one of them, so should fail the probe. > Is my understanding right ? Yes Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
