linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v3 2/5] dma: mpc512x: add support for peripheral transfers

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: <CAF0T0X5YU=7Q=SmRvQ6Nr-awmext5EAk7SqtuqeLcySo1jazYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Aug 2013 18:12:13 +0400
From:	Alexander Popov <a13xp0p0v88@...il.com>
To:	Alexander Popov <a13xp0p0v88@...il.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Anatolij Gustschin <agust@...x.de>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 2/5] dma: mpc512x: add support for peripheral transfers

2013/8/3 Gerhard Sittig <gsi@...x.de>:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:21 +0400, Alexander Popov wrote:
>>
> You don't provide a lot of information to those you want to
> receive feedback from.  You should keep a history and list the
> changes between versions.  And you may want to somehow link this
> v3 to its predecessor -- especially when you only send part of
> the series and assume that reviewers may know where to find the
> remainder.
>
> Please help those persons you want to get help from.

Thanks. Now I see how to collaborate via mailing lists properly.

> I think it's unfortunate to attribute the "will access
> peripheral" to the channel instead of the transfer job, and to
> set the flag from within the device control callback, and to
> nevery clear the flag (what will happen if a channel gets freed
> and reallocated by some other client?).
>
> I think that the peripheral access is an attribute of the
> transfer job, and should be setup in the prep routines (both set
> and cleared, depending on what gets setup).  This would be more
> robust and more readable (read: maintainable) in my eyes.

Yes. I agree, I will implement it and offer differences from RFC v2
in the initial topic.

Best regards,
Alexander.
--
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/