Re: [PATCH 03/14] platform/x86/intel/ifs: return a more appropriate Error code

[Sohil Mehta]

On 10/21/2022 1:34 PM, Jithu Joseph wrote:
> scan_chunks_sanity_check() was returning -ENOMEM if it encounters
> an error while copying IFS test image from memory to Secure Memory.

Same as before:

s/was returning/returns

> Return -EIO in this scenario, as it is more appropriate.

Do the first 3 patches need a 'Fixes' tag? Or is the idea here that the 
feature isn't truly enabled so everything before removing the BROKEN tag 
will be considered together?