linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] tty: n_gsm: Make mux work as a responder station

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: <07d0ae1e589f95a9aa3972407068a935@tnode.com>
Date:	Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:28:32 +0000
From:	Andrej Krpic <ak77@...de.com>
To:	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <jslaby@...e.com>,
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] tty: n_gsm: Make mux work as a responder station

On 21.02.2016 23:42, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 22:38:29 +0100
> Andrej Krpic <ak77@...de.com> wrote:
>
>> When using n_gsm you have to explicitly set it to work as a 
>> initiator
>> station. This led me to believe that it can also work as a 
>> responder.
snip
> This looks reasonable to me. It was never intended to work as a 
> responder
> but it seems clean enough to do so. Have you tested it against some 
> other
> modems with these changes applied ?

It has been tested against SIM900 (SIMCom) and M66 (Quectel).

> (I'm always wary of patches to this going in without testing on 
> actual
> modems, because the spec is complex and we are not the only ones with
> bugs)

While second and third patch don't change anything for initiator mode 
mux,
others certainly do.

> Also can you please cc these patches to
> 	xinhuix.pan@...el.com

This address got rejected. Yours and LKML's didn't.


-Andrej