On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:43:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > On Mon Oct 28 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2 > > > > > + ? "2.0" : "1.2"); > > > > > > > > This is not right. Should be either "1" or "2". > > > > > > > > /Jarkko > > > > > > Okay I will fix that up. Do we have a final decision on the file name, > > > major_version versus version_major? > > > > Well, I don't see how major_version would make any sense. It is > > not as future proof as version_major. Still waiting for Jason's > > feedback for this. > > $ find /sys/ -name "*version*" > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:17.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/ahci_host_version > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_mld_version > /sys/devices/virtual/net/docker0/bridge/multicast_igmp_version > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/lowest_supported_fw_version > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/last_attempt_version > /sys/firmware/efi/esrt/entries/entry0/fw_version > /sys/module/acpi/parameters/acpica_version > > etc.. > > Not a single example of the backward version. > > Most likely it should be called 'tpm_version' The postfix gives tells the part of the version number that the file reports. If you really want to add the prefix, then the appropriate name would be tpm_version_major. I'd still go with just version_major as tpm_ prefix is somewhat redundant. /Jarkko
