| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 21:47:52 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Cc: Javier González <javier@...igon.com>, Valentin Manea <valentin.manea@...wei.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, emmanuel.michel@...com, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, jean-michel.delorme@...com, tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] tee: add OP-TEE driver On Sunday 19 April 2015 13:17:20 Javier González wrote: > > Only providing user space support would defeat one of the main purposes > of the driver. We could better organize the patches and divide them into user > space support and in-kernel support if that is what you mean. In the end > the interfaces are orthogonal, even though the functionality should be very > similar. Splitting up the patches to separate the user interface from the in-kernel interface is certainly a good idea, but aside from that, I also agree with Greg on this point: if you want to establish an in-kernel interface, don't add any dead code at the beginning, but add it together with the users of that interface. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists