linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] extcon : callback function to read cable property

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2012 06:34:47 +0000
From:	"Tc, Jenny" <jenny.tc@...el.com>
To:	"myungjoo.ham@...sung.com" <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
	"cw00.choi@...sung.com" <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	anish kumar <anish198519851985@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] extcon : callback function to read cable property

Myunjoo/Chanwoo

Ping...
Could you please review this patch?

-jtc

> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] extcon : callback function to read cable
> > > property
> > >
> > > I think the reason why we have extcon is in first place is to only
> > > notify the clients of cable connection and disconnection and it is
> > > up to the client to decide what else to do with the cable such as
> > > finding which state it is in and other details.
> > > So I feel this should not be handled in the extcon.
> > >
> > > However it is up to the maintainer to decide.
> >
> > Once the consumer gets the notification, it needs to take some action.
> > One of the action is to read the cable properties. This can be done by
> > proprietary calls which is known both to the consumer and the provider.
> > My intention is to avoid this proprietary calls. Since both the
> > provider and consumer are communicating with the extcon subsystem , I
> > feel having a callback function of this kind would help to avoid the
> > use of proprietary calls. Also I agree that extcon notifier chains are
> > used to notify the cable state (attach/detach). But if a cable has
> > more than two states (like the charger cable) how do we support it without
> having a callback function like this?
> > Let the maintainer take the final decision.
> Well this use case will keep on growing if we start factor in this kind of
> changes and that is why I am opposed to adding any other state.
> Maintainer?
> >
> >
>