On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:01:19PM -0500, Ashley Lai wrote: > > > Agreed, there are still lots of patches to go before the subsystem > > meets the current kernel standard.. > > > > Speaking of which, has anyone looked at the rest of my series?? Shall > > I repost it? > > Jason, > Are you referring to the for-tpm branch on github? > https://github.com/jgunthorpe/linux/commits/for-tpm > Peter already submitted most of the patches to James from this branch. > Let us know which series need to be review.
All of those patches in for-tpm have gone to James. However, the original series I posted included 5 additional patches that have received no comment, available on: https://github.com/jgunthorpe/linux/commits/tpm-devel Jason Gunthorpe: tpm: Pull everything related to /dev/tpmX into tpm-dev.c tpm: Pull everything related to sysfs into tpm-sysfs.c tpm: Create a tpm_class_ops structure and use it in the drivers tpm: Use the ops structure instead of a copy in tpm_vendor_specific tpm: Make tpm-dev allocate a per-file structure These would have been posted as patch numbers 8 through 13 in the original series. I think what happened is at this point in the series module compile broke. That is fixed now in the for-james pull, so the rest of the series should be looked at. Peter's checkpatch clean up will create some minor conflicts, so I should probably resend the lot after rebasing it. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
