Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6] integrity: TPM internel kernel interface | From | Rajiv Andrade <> | Date | Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:31:14 -0200 |
| |
> > > + > > > +/** > > > + * tpm_pcr_read - read a pcr value > > > + * @chip_id: tpm chip identifier > > > + * Upper 2 bytes: ANY, HW_ONLY or SW_ONLY > > > + * Lower 2 bytes: tpm idx # or AN& > > > + * @pcr_idx: pcr idx to retrieve > > > + * @res_buf: TPM_PCR value > > > + * size of res_buf is 20 bytes (or NULL if you don't care) > > > + * > > > + * The TPM driver should be built-in, but for whatever reason it > > > + * isn't, protect against the chip disappearing, by incrementing > > > + * the module usage count. > > > + */ > > > +int tpm_pcr_read(u32 chip_id, int pcr_idx, u8 *res_buf) > > > +{ > > > + u8 data[READ_PCR_RESULT_SIZE]; > > > + int rc; > > > + __be32 index; > > > + int chip_num = chip_id & TPM_CHIP_NUM_MASK; > > > + struct tpm_chip *chip; > > > + > > > + rcu_read_lock(); > > > + chip = tpm_chip_lookup(chip_num, chip_id >> TPM_CHIP_TYPE_SHIFT); > > > + if (chip == NULL) { > > > + rcu_read_unlock(); > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > + } > > > + if (!try_module_get(chip->dev->driver->owner)) { > > > + rcu_read_unlock(); > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > + } > > > + rcu_read_unlock(); > > > > This little bit of lookup, check for NULL, and try_module_get() looks > > cut-n-pasted in the next two functions. Should be consolidated. > > > > Same here. > > > Also, if you need to shift down the chip_id every time anyway, why not > > just do it inside the lookup function? > > tpm_chip_lookup() only needs the chip type, not the entire chip_id, so > its usage is probably clearer if written this way. >
Wait.. chip_num, the other parameter, depends on chip_id and a previously defined constant, so, you are right, it's saner to just pass chip_id to it.. sorry, and thanks. This will be included also on the next patchset I'm about to send.
Rajiv
| |