From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750730AbWDTIAc (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2006 04:00:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750761AbWDTIAc (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2006 04:00:32 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:29410 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750730AbWDTIAb (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2006 04:00:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 00:59:38 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Kylene Jo Hall Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: fix missing string Message-Id: <20060420005938.6c3d4319.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1145474021.4894.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145474021.4894.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kylene Jo Hall wrote: > > A string corresponding to the tcpa_pc_event_id POST_CONTENTS was missing > causing an overflow bug when access was attempted in the get_event_name > function. These last two bugs are applicable to 2.6.17. I'm kind of thinking of pushing all the TPM patches into 2.6.17 actually. Although there's quite a lot of feature work in there, we also have bugfixes, although relatively minor ones. What's your confidence level in those patches? Would you have time to do a decent round of regression testing against the resulting TPM code prior to 2.6.17? Say, inside the next couple of weeks?