From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760069Ab2ILDXA (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2012 23:23:00 -0400 Received: from tundra.namei.org ([65.99.196.166]:43136 "EHLO tundra.namei.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759868Ab2ILDW6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2012 23:22:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:16:25 +1000 (EST) From: James Morris To: Kent Yoder cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Ashley Lai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, adlai@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] drivers/char/tpm: Add new device driver to support IBM vTPM In-Reply-To: <20120907173809.GA19704@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <1344987282.4430.26.camel@footlong> <1345670263.25124.7.camel@footlong> <20120822214217.GB13519@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1346816407.2257.37.camel@pasglop> <20120905154644.GA14925@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1346879505.19098.3.camel@pasglop> <20120907173809.GA19704@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Kent Yoder wrote: > > > James did accept my pull request, so these are already in > > > security-next... > > > > For the driver itself, it's not a big issue (though I did found issue > > while reviewing it so it will need another round of updates). For the > > code that changes arch/powerpc, especially prom_init.c, that stuff must > > at the very least be acked by me (or the acting powerpc person if I'm > > away) if it's going to go via a different tree. > > Sorry about that. Hopefully there won't be any changes there and we > can amend with your ack. > > As for the driver updates, I'd hate to see everyone else's code in the > pull request get delayed yet again. James, will it be ok to apply the > update on top of security-next? I guess? -- James Morris