linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/46] Nandsim facelift (part I of II)

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:   Mon, 14 Nov 2016 17:24:18 +0100
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     Daniel Walter <dwalter@...ma-star.at>,
        "linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/46] Nandsim facelift (part I of II)

Boris,

sorry for the late answer. I was not on CC, therefore this mail was
unnoticed by me. :-(

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> Daniel, Richard,
>
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 11:43:29 +0200
> Daniel Walter <dwalter@...ma-star.at> wrote:
>
>> Changes since V1:
>>   Incooperate feedback for nand_cleanup()
>>   Improve commit messages

[..-]

> I really like the new approach for 2 reasons:
> 1/ it allows creating several NAND devs, and you can do that after the
>    module has been loaded.
> 2/ it fixes the partial NAND detection support by allowing one to
>    describe its NAND in term of page size, eraseblock size, oob
>    size, ...
>
> But I'm wondering if we should not create a new driver instead of
> trying to fix the old one (I must admit I haven't been through the 46
> patches of this series, but last time we discussed it on IRC, Richard
> said it actually was a complete rewrite of the nandsim driver).
>
> Moreover, if we specify the flash layout manually, maybe we could make
> it an mtdsim driver instead of restricting the emulation to NAND
> devices.
>
> What do you think?

I think we don't need a completely new driver. This series just adds
functionality to nandsim without much cost, in fact we reuse also some
bits from nandsim.
If we add a new nandsim alike driver we basically give up the current nandsim
and it will die a painful death. This series tries to avoid that.
What we can do is splitting nandsim into three files (common, old and new).

P.s: Yes, I'm aware of the fact that then I'll have to maintain the beast. ;-\

-- 
Thanks,
//richard