[PATCH v4 2/2] tpm: ibmvtpm: Rename tpm_process_cmd to tpm_status and define flag

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 08:15:14AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> 
> On 8/10/21 10:10 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 09:50:55PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > > On 8/10/21 1:58 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 03:21:59PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > > > > From: Stefan Berger <stefanb at linux.ibm.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Rename the field tpm_processing_cmd to tpm_status in ibmvtpm_dev and set
> > > > > the TPM_STATUS_BUSY flag while the vTPM is busy processing a command.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >    		default:
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.h
> > > > > index 51198b137461..252f1cccdfc5 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.h
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.h
> > > > > @@ -41,7 +41,8 @@ struct ibmvtpm_dev {
> > > > >    	wait_queue_head_t wq;
> > > > >    	u16 res_len;
> > > > >    	u32 vtpm_version;
> > > > > -	u8 tpm_processing_cmd;
> > > > > +	u8 tpm_status;
> > > > > +#define TPM_STATUS_BUSY		(1 << 0) /* vtpm is processing a command */
> > > > Declare this already in the fix, and just leave the rename here.
> > > You mean the fix patch does not use 'true' anymore but uses the
> > > TPM_STATUS_BUSY flag already but the name is still tpm_processing_cmd? And
> > > literally only the renaming of this field is done in the 2nd patch?
> > I can fixup these patches, and use '1', instead of true. No need to send
> > new ones.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko at kernel.org>

I applied the first. If you have only one flag that you even
document as "processing the command" in the inline comment,
it makes absolutely no sense to rename it, as the current
name perfectly documents what it exactly is.

/Jarkko