Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()

2018-05-14 Thread Jarkko Sakkinen
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 01:46:00PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:07:32PM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote: > > tpm_try_transmit currently checks TPM status every 5 msecs between > > send and recv. It does so in a loop for the maximum timeout as defined > > in the TPM Interface S

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()

2018-05-14 Thread Jarkko Sakkinen
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:07:32PM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote: > tpm_try_transmit currently checks TPM status every 5 msecs between > send and recv. It does so in a loop for the maximum timeout as defined > in the TPM Interface Specification. However, the TPM may return before > 5 msecs. Thus the poll

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()

2018-05-14 Thread Nayna Jain
On 05/10/2018 06:11 PM, Nayna Jain wrote: On 05/08/2018 10:04 PM, J Freyensee wrote:   do { -    tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP); +    tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL); I'm just curious why it was decided to still use tpm_msleep() here instead of usleep_range() which was u

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()

2018-05-10 Thread Nayna Jain
On 05/08/2018 10:04 PM, J Freyensee wrote:   do { -    tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP); +    tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL); I'm just curious why it was decided to still use tpm_msleep() here instead of usleep_range() which was used in the 2nd patch. TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL is i

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()

2018-05-08 Thread J Freyensee
do { - tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP); + tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL); I'm just curious why it was decided to still use tpm_msleep() here instead of usleep_range() which was used in the 2nd patch. Otherwise, Acked-by: Jay Freyensee