linux-kernel - Re: [-next] staging/vme: various fixes + new driver model for VME

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: <20101022230317.GM10869@flamenco.cs.columbia.edu>
Date:	Fri, 22 Oct 2010 19:03:17 -0400
From:	"Emilio G. Cota" <cota@...ap.org>
To:	Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...com>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Juan David Gonzalez Cobas <david.cobas@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [-next] staging/vme: various fixes + new driver model for VME

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:26:11 +0100, Martyn Welch wrote:
> On 22/10/10 07:36, Emilio G. Cota wrote:
> 
> Hi Emilio,
> 
> Thank you for the fixes. After a quick glance, there seem to be a number
> of valid fixes here, but I'm very concerned by the patches that change
> the driver model. We discussed this approach in August last year, I am
> still yet to be convinced by the approach you wish to take.

Yes I remember we discussed it privately. I didn't provide a solution
at that point, I just told you that I believed the model could
be improved--and this is my attempt.

> > 
> > - Make DMA work on the tsi148 (it's the only bridge I've got).
> >   This will probably involve changing or extending the
> >   current API.
> 
> The DMA is already working on the tsi148. In what way do you feel that
> the current API needs changing or extending for DMA?

Sorry I may be confused here. That's the impression I got after reading
the DMA code a few months ago.

Anyway forget about this for the time being.

> > - Test the whole thing with real hardware and a real VME driver
> >   (currently out of tree as well, see [2]), which I'll try
> >   to get merged, too--currently we just have vme_user.c which
> >   really isn't a kosher driver.
> > 
> 
> The current API has been tested with real hardware, for both supported
> vme bridges, on multiple cards, by multiple people. If the changes to
> the API are to be applied, they would need to be throughly tested before
> they are applied. As I've said above - I am still not convinced by the
> change in approach.

Well what we have merged is just vme_user, which is an unusual driver
that is not even finished yet. I can't speak of what's not merged.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to say that the current code has
never been tested.

What I wanted to say is that I could eventually merge a driver, and
that could validate the whole thing. However I wouldn't like to
port everything, test it, and then get a NAK because of the changed
driver model. So that's why I'm sending this first--I don't mind
if it's not yet merged, but at least I'd like to know if I'm on
the right track.

Thanks

		Emilio
--
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/