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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2017 17:14:42 -0500
From:   Franklin S Cooper Jr <fcooper@...com>
To:     <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <wg@...ndegger.com>, <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Subject: CAN-FD Transceiver Limitations

Hi All,

The various CAN transceivers I've seen that support CAN-FD appear to be
fairly limited in terms of their supported max speed. I've seen some
transceivers that only support upto 2 Mbps while others support up to  5
Mbps. This is a problem when the SoC's CAN IP can support even higher
values than the transceiver.

Ideally I would think the MCAN driver should at the very least know what
the maximum speed supported by the transceiver it is connected to.
Therefore, either throwing an error if a request for a speed above the
transceiver capability or lower the requested speed to what ever the
transceiver is capability of doing.

In either case I do not know if it makes sense to add a DT property
within the MCAN driver or create another subnode that contains this
information. For example I see some ethernet drivers support
"fixed-link" subnode which is trying to solve a similar issue. Should I
go with that approach? If so would it make sense to reuse fixed-link
even though majority of its properties aren't applicable? Or should I
create something similar such as fixed-can-transceiver?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ