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: <20150806110018.GS20873@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 6 Aug 2015 12:00:18 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...il.com>,
	"R, Vignesh" <vigneshr@...com>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Huang Shijie <b32955@...escale.com>,
	MTD Maling List <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] spi: introduce flag for memory mapped read

On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 11:22:25AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

> If that's the case, then maybe you should consider whether using the SPI
> bus infrastructure is really the best way forward.  Would it make more
> sense instead to adopt a different software structure, something more
> high-level like:

>      +-------------------------------------------+
>      |          m25p80 high-level driver         |
>      +----------------------+--------------------+
>      |   SPI m25p80 driver  |                    |
>      +----------------------+                    |
>      |      SPI layer       |  Special driver    |
>      +----------------------+                    |
>      |    SPI bus driver    |                    |
>      +----------------------+--------------------+
>      |     SPI hardware     |  Special hardware  |
>      +----------------------+--------------------+

Yes, that's what's been talked about before - for some of these devices
they're sufficiently flash specialist that we just don't bother exposing
a SPI interface at all though AIUI they could be persuaded to do it.  It
isn't entirely clear that we want exactly that split, if the devices are
reasonable SPI controllers we will want to handle the case where they
have flash and non-flash devices on the same bus.  For that there is
going to be some generalisable work possible for managing switching
between memory mapped and SPI modes where those are mutually exclusive,
especially if the switch between them isn't free.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ