On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 04:26:33PM -0800, Tadeusz Struk wrote:
> On 11/15/18 3:31 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > You could drop these memset() calls and also one from
> > tpm_timeout_work(). The call could be done once in the beginning of
> > tpm_common_write() instead of having three different cal
On 11/15/18 3:31 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> You could drop these memset() calls and also one from
> tpm_timeout_work(). The call could be done once in the beginning of
> tpm_common_write() instead of having three different call sites.
>
Don't we want to clean the buffer as the response is read?
On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 01:31:58AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 12:42:22PM -0800, Tadeusz Struk wrote:
> > Currently to read a response from the TPM device an application needs
> > provide big enough buffer for the whole response and read it in one go.
> > The application
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 12:42:22PM -0800, Tadeusz Struk wrote:
> Currently to read a response from the TPM device an application needs
> provide big enough buffer for the whole response and read it in one go.
> The application doesn't know how big the response it beforehand so it
> always needs to
Currently to read a response from the TPM device an application needs
provide big enough buffer for the whole response and read it in one go.
The application doesn't know how big the response it beforehand so it
always needs to maintain a 4K buffer and read the max (4K).
In case if the user of the
5 matches
Mail list logo
