linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] vtunerc: virtual DVB device - is it ok to NACK driver because of worrying about possible misusage?

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: <4EDD3583.30405@linuxtv.org>
Date:	Mon, 05 Dec 2011 22:20:03 +0100
From:	Andreas Oberritter <obi@...uxtv.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
	HoP <jpetrous@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] vtunerc: virtual DVB device - is it ok to NACK driver because
 of worrying about possible misusage?

On 05.12.2011 21:55, Alan Cox wrote:
> The USB case is quite different because your latency is very tightly
> bounded, your dead device state is rigidly defined, and your loss of
> device is accurately and immediately signalled.
> 
> Quite different.

How can usbip work if networking and usb are so different and what's so
different between vtunerc and usbip, that made it possible to put usbip
into drivers/staging?

Regards,
Andreas
--
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/