On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 12:28:47PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 at 01:50, Jarkko Sakkinen jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 03:04:18PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
Isn't this statement contradicting with your earlier statement regarding the right order would be to complete TEE patches review first and then come up with documentation here [2]?
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/1568025601.4614.253.camel@linux.ibm.... [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20190909163643.qxmzpcggi567hmhv@linu...
With the intersecting issues, namely key generation and conflicting keyctl parameters, that was not a well considered statement.
Okay, let me work on documentation first, but I think resending whole patch-set just for documentation review and rework would be an overkill. Would minor revisions of this patch only like v3.1, v3.2 etc. work for you? And later I could send next version of this patch-set once we agree on documentation.
Yeah, we could iterate through the documentation patch and once we are happy with it you can bundle it to your main patch set.
/Jarkko