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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 25 Jun 2017 23:44:19 +0200
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <enrico.weigelt@...3.net>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: RFC: abstraction for RPC'ish hardware drivers ? mailbox ? netif ?

Hi folks,


I'm currently implementing drivers for an industrial backplane, (*1)
which uses some kind of rpc / command-response mechanism.

There're different variants, eg. some proprietary serial interface,
USB link, pci cards, etc. On top of that there's a block-based command-
response mechanism for talking to the individual cards (which may have
multiple channels).

In the device I'm currently working on, we have several cards, eg.
CPU, PMU (power supply) and several IO modules. My primary goal is
docking in the IO cards into IIO (and later the PMU into the power
management infrastructure).

So, I need layers: the serial port (using uart stuff), the packet
layer and IIO. (and wire them via DT)

I see two possible candidates here:
a) mailbox
b) network interface

Both of them seem to be a good fit for packet-based interfaces,
but the network layer might be too much overhead, and (IMHO) doesn't
seem to be suited for direct use from (non network-protocol) drivers.


What do you folks think ?


--mtx

--
Enrico, Sohn von Wilfried, a.d.F. Weigelt,
metux IT consulting
+49-151-27565287

Powered by blists - more mailing lists