linux-kernel - Re: [mmc] alternative TI FM MMC/SD driver for 2.6.21-rc7

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <5a04609e0704220515h4049afas4dc98b90e66d1d16@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:15:22 +0300
From:	"Sergey Yanovich" <ynvich@...il.com>
To:	"Alex Dubov" <oakad@...oo.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [mmc] alternative TI FM MMC/SD driver for 2.6.21-rc7

Hi,

> > Finally, tifm_sd module needs to be manually inserted.
>
> By the way, the driver emits custom uevent when the new card is detected. I was going to look at
> this some day in the future, but if you want to mess a little with hotplug scripts the issue can
> be easily solved.

It would be nice if you to provide a sample script. Unfortunately,
hotplug scripts are distribution specific. And internal knowledge of
your modules is required to write one.

For a typical, non-linux-geek user there are just two states of the device -
available and not available. Ububtu is famous for its end-user support.
They ship your driver since linux-2.6.17. But they pack it in one module.
And that is _much_ easier, then a hotplug script.

And maybe, you would care to create a branch in you repository for
in-the-tree compiles.

> As I already said before, many of the complications exist because this is  an universal adapter,
> and memorystick support is quite near in the queue.

The scope of your project is exceptionally wide. You plan to develop a whole
new layer for memorystick as a part.

At the same time, the [tifm_sd] code is device specific, and [tifm_7xx1]
code is also device specific. And both modules depend on the same device
(of family of devices). That makes me think that a bus/controller/slot
construction is not going to make thing any easier, but adds complexity.

In case of MMC/SD all abstraction has already been separated by the mmc
layer, in case of MS it is up to you, how to implement.
-
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/