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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1178609496.5222.24.camel@roc-desktop>
Date:	Tue, 08 May 2007 15:31:35 +0800
From:	Bryan WU <bryan.wu@...log.com>
To:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
Cc:	Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>,
	spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [spi-devel-general] adding bits_per_word to struct
	spi_board_info to mirror struct spi_device

On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 22:00 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 07 May 2007, Bryan WU wrote:
> 
> > currently, there are some duplicated data members in spi_device struct
> > spi_board_info struct. This two structs are confused driver writers and
> > boards driver users.
> 
> How would that confusion arise?  Only arch/.../board-xxx.c writers
> normally even see spi_board_info; the exception is that someone who
> writes an add-on board -- maybe a USB-to-SPI adapter -- would call the
> rarely used spi_new_device() routine.
> 
> Developers writing a SPI drivers -- controller drivers touching some
> SOC's serial controller hardware, or "struct spi_driver" protocol code
> talking to a chip through such a controller -- never see board info.
> They only see "struct spi_device".  So I don't see why they would have
> a reason to be confused.
> 
> - Dave

Yes, I agree with you.
spi_board_info ---> board writers.
spi_device ---> spi device driver writers.

It is very clear for me, a spi_master driver developer.

But how does a board writer know the capabilities which the target
spi_device driver supports? For example, a board writer use 16
bits_per_word in a spi_board_info, while the spi_device does not support
this. And maybe other special function spi_device driver can provide but
board writer doesn't know or doesn't know how to use this in
spi_board_info.

So can we just use one struct for both board writers and spi device
driver developers?

Thanks
-Bryan Wu

-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ