linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] gadget: Introduce the notifier functions

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]

Date:	Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:17:27 -0500
From:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
CC:	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <sre@...nel.org>,
	<dbaryshkov@...il.com>, <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	<peter.chen@...escale.com>, <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	<r.baldyga@...sung.com>, <sojka@...ica.cz>,
	<yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	<lee.jones@...aro.org>, <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	<broonie@...nel.org>, <patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	<linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	<device-mainlining@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] gadget: Introduce the notifier functions


Hi,

Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> writes:
> HI!
>
>> > +	int ret;
>> > +
>> > +	mutex_lock(&gadget->lock);
>> > +	ret = raw_notifier_chain_unregister(&gadget->nh, nb);
>> 
>> Greg, this is the kind of thing I wanted to avoid adding more of.
>> 
>> I was wondering if you would accept subsystems using kdbus for
>> this sort of notification. I'm okay waiting for kdbus for another
>> couple merge windows (if we have to) before that's merged, but
>> if we take this raw notifier approach now, we will end up having
>> to support it forever.
>> 
>> Also, because soon enough we will have to support USB Power Delivery
>> with Type C connector, this is bound to change in the coming months.
>> 
>> Frankly, I wanted all of this to be decided in userland with the
>> kernel just providing notification and basic safety checks (we don't
>> want to allow a bogus userspace daemon frying anybody's devices).
>> 
>> How would you feel about that ?
>
> So init=/bin/bash boot no longer provides machine that charges itself?
>
> That would be bad. Traditionally, hardware controls battery charging,
> and if hardware needs some help, we should do it in kernel, to mask
> the difference from userspace.

this is a very valid point which I hadn't considered :-)

Seems like kernel it is, no matter how easy or how difficult it gets.

Mark, when can we try to have a discussion about how to get this
upstream ? It seems like designing everything in the mailing list will
just take forever. Any ideas ?

-- 
balbi

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (819 bytes)