linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] i2c: at91: slave mode support

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: <20180730071443.clib3swtsommj7jk@M43218.corp.atmel.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:14:43 +0200
From:   Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
CC:     <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <me@....yt>,
        <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>, <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] i2c: at91: slave mode support

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 12:41:41AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > [Ludovic Desroches]
> > Changes in v3:
> >  - rebase (cherry-pick was enough)
> 
> Thanks for the rebase. I wonder, though, I recall to had more
> complicated issues. However...
> 
> >  - fix checkpatch errors
> >  - tests:
> >    - hangs with a SAMA5D4 (master and slave on different busses) after about
> >    100 transfers. It's the firs time I do this test.
> >    - some mismatches with a SAMA5D4 as slave and a SAMA5D2 as master
> >    I don't know if it's a regression. I don't remember having seen this
> >    behavior previously.
> >    I think it's worth taking those patches even if there are some possible
> >    bugs. It'll allow to get more people using it and so to consolidate the
> >    slave mode support.
> 
> I really want to see those patches go upstream, too. But I am also not a
> big fan of delivering the user something with known issues. Especially
> not when they affect the main feature to be added. My rationale here is
> that someone who is able to fix the issues remaining will also be able
> to pick up and apply patches.
> 
> Maybe, maybe if it was to be enabled by a special
> I2C_AT91_SLAVE_EXPERIMANTEL symbol with lots of explanations. I need to
> think twice about that, though.
> 

I understand your point. The experimental mentionning could be a good
trade-off. Let me know once you make up your mind.

> Speaking of Kconfig, I think this series needs to place a
> 
> 	select I2C_SLAVE
> 
> somewhere.
> 

Ok I'll update it if we go further with this set of patches.

Regards

Ludovic