Could anyone shed any light on that change to drivers/char/tpm/Kconfig? Thanks, Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
The TPM driver directory was upgraded by Stefan Berger while we were still on 2.6.16 (c/s 10523) and the Kconfig was not touched during the upgrade to 2.6.18. I''ve cc''ed Stefan for confirmation, but my suspicion is that this difference versus native is unintentional and should be fixed. -- Keir On 12/2/07 09:16, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote:> Could anyone shed any light on that change to drivers/char/tpm/Kconfig? > > Thanks, Jan > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir, Jan, I imported the 2.6.17 tpm.c, tpm.h and Kconfig while we were at 2.6.16 because of API features I explained here: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2006-10/msg00286.html Now this is stale. I will send you a patch that allows us to just use tpm.c from the plain kernel and patches tpm.h and Kconfig so that the xen-specific TPM driver can actually be compiled. Changes are needed here. This will be a patch I put into the ''patches'' directory and that will have to be carried along for a while. Is that ok? Stefan xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com wrote on 02/12/2007 04:31:36 AM:> The TPM driver directory was upgraded by Stefan Berger while we werestill> on 2.6.16 (c/s 10523) and the Kconfig was not touched during the upgradeto> 2.6.18. I''ve cc''ed Stefan for confirmation, but my suspicion is thatthis> difference versus native is unintentional and should be fixed. > > -- Keir > > On 12/2/07 09:16, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote: > > > Could anyone shed any light on that change todrivers/char/tpm/Kconfig?> > > > Thanks, Jan > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xen-devel mailing list > > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 12/2/07 12:02, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:> Now this is stale. I will send you a patch that allows us to just use tpm.c > from the plain kernel and patches tpm.h and Kconfig so that the xen-specific > TPM driver can actually be compiled. Changes are needed here. This will be a > patch I put into the ''patches'' directory and that will have to be carried > along for a while. Is that ok?Can you just bring them up to 2.6.18 and avoid needing a separate patch in the patches directory? -- Keir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote on 02/12/2007 07:03:57 AM:> > > > On 12/2/07 12:02, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:> Now this is stale. I will send you a patch that allows us to just > use tpm.c from the plain kernel and patches tpm.h and Kconfig so > that the xen-specific TPM driver can actually be compiled. Changes > are needed here. This will be a patch I put into the ''patches'' > directory and that will have to be carried along for a while. Is thatok?> > Can you just bring them up to 2.6.18 and avoid needing a separate > patch in the patches directory?Either way is fine. Though I''d like to remove the tpm.c and use the one from the plain kernel instead and remove some changes from tpm.h as well. This should not affect applications. Stefan> > -- Keir_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 12/2/07 13:57, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:>> > Can you just bring them up to 2.6.18 and avoid needing a separate >> > patch in the patches directory? > > Either way is fine. Though I''d like to remove the tpm.c and use the one from > the plain kernel instead and remove some changes from tpm.h as well. This > should not affect applications.Fine. Anything that takes us towards plain 2.6.18 files is good and doesn¹t need to go in the patches/ directory. It will simply reduce our diff. -- Keir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel