linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/2] drivers:bluetooth: TI

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]

Message-ID: <19F8576C6E063C45BE387C64729E739404AA21D1B4@dbde02.ent.ti.com>
Date:	Thu, 7 Oct 2010 20:53:09 +0530
From:	"Savoy, Pavan" <pavan_savoy@...com>
To:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
CC:	"linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org" <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
	"johan.hedberg@...il.com" <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
	"greg@...ah.com" <greg@...ah.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] drivers:bluetooth: TI_ST bluetooth driver


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcel Holtmann [mailto:marcel@...tmann.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 10:18 AM
> To: Savoy, Pavan
> Cc: linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org; johan.hedberg@...il.com; greg@...ah.com;
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] drivers:bluetooth: TI_ST bluetooth driver
> 
> Hi Pavan,
> 
> > > Registering the Bluetooth HCI driver in module_init/module_exit is not
> > > acceptable. Turn your shared transport into a proper bus.
> >
> > Yes, you did comment on it before, I remember, I did prototype the driver as
> > a bus driver, However I didn't find any advantages by converting it to a bus
> > driver.
> > As in, currently the shared transport driver is a line discipline driver
> because
> > it is the only way it can communicate over TTY without being tightly coupled
> with the UART driver.
> >
> > > We want to be able to have generic kernels where this module is enabled,
> > > but no Shared Transport is available.
> >
> > Oh if this is the reason I cannot have hci_register/_unregister in
> module_init/_exit, Can I do this module "depends" on TI_ST, Then it would not
> > even be visible to build if TI_ST is not selected.
> 
> this is not helping either. Then TI_ST can not be selected and so you
> still end up with some weird platform specific kernels. We don't want
> that. We want generic kernels that can detect the hardware they are
> running on.
> 
> As I said, I will not accept this driver if it registers HCI device in
> module_init. No other driver is doing this and it is in general a really
> really really bad idea.
> 

Ok, now I am beginning to get what you say, Let me check, may be what
I can do is, have something like a st_prepare() function called in the
module_init, and a _probe function of the bluetooth driver will be called,
_ONLY_ if the _probe of my platform driver has been called..
Do you think this would be a good idea?

Note: the TI_ST driver is also a platform device driver, so that TI_ST's
Probe is not called, if a arch/xx/board-xx doesn't add it.

Please suggest.


> 
> Marcel
> 

--
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/