linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/5] Add I3C subsystem

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: <20170731204701.GD1542@katana>
Date:   Mon, 31 Jul 2017 22:47:01 +0200
From:   Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Przemyslaw Sroka <psroka@...ence.com>,
        Arkadiusz Golec <agolec@...ence.com>,
        Alan Douglas <adouglas@...ence.com>,
        Bartosz Folta <bfolta@...ence.com>,
        Damian Kos <dkos@...ence.com>,
        Alicja Jurasik-Urbaniak <alicja@...ence.com>,
        Jan Kotas <jank@...ence.com>,
        Cyprian Wronka <cwronka@...ence.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] Add I3C subsystem


> > I agree this is the least invasive and also the most compatible
> > approach. The other solution would probably be to have some kind of
> > emulation layer?
> 
> Could you detail a bit more what you mean by "emulation layer"?

Not really. That was more a extremly high level approach of what
theoretically could be possible. When I try to think about details, it
gets pretty invasive.

> > Since the spec is not public, details about the protocol will be
> > especially useful, I'd say.
> 
> Okay, I'll see what I can do.

Thanks.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)