On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 21:04, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 04:00:32PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > > Provide documentation for usage of TEE based Trusted Keys via existing > > user-space "keyctl" utility. Also, document various use-cases. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sorry missed this patch. Anyway, I don't think we want multiple trusted > keys subsystems. You have to fix the existing one if you care to get > these changes in. There is no really other way around this. > I understand your point. When I initially looked at trusted key implementation, it seemed to be tightly coupled to use TPM device. So I implemented a parallel implementation to get initial feedback (functionality-wise) on this new approach. I will work on abstraction of trusted key apis to use either approach. But is it fine with you if I send if I send a separate RFC patch for abstraction and later once reviewed I will incorporate that patch in this patch-set. It will be really helpful if you could help to test that abstraction patch with a real TPM device as I doesn't posses one to test. -Sumit > /Jarkko
