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: <20180824101145.GA1510@amd>
Date:   Fri, 24 Aug 2018 12:11:45 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
Cc:     Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>, rteysseyre@...il.com,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, broonie@...nel.org,
        linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] leds: core: Introduce LED pattern trigger

Hi!

> I think that it would be more flexible if software pattern fallback
> was applied in case of pattern_set failure. Otherwise, it would
> lead to the situation where LED class devices that support hardware
> blinking couldn't be applied the same set of patterns as LED class
> devices that don't implement pattern_set. The latter will always have to
> resort to using software pattern engine which will accept far greater
> amount of pattern combinations.
> 
> In this case we need to discuss on what basis the decision will be
> made on whether hardware or software engine will be used.
> 
> Possible options coming to mind:
> - an interface will be provided to determine max difference between
>   the settings supported by the hardware and the settings requested by
>   the user, that will result in aligning user's setting to the hardware
>   capabilities
> - the above alignment rate will be predefined instead
> - hardware engine will be used only if user requests supported settings
>   on the whole span of the requested pattern
> - in each of the above cases it would be worth to think of the
>   interface to show the scope of the settings supported by hardware

I'd recommend keeping it simple. We use hardware engine if driver
author thinks pattern is "close enough".

If human can not tell the difference, it probably is.

We may want to do something more formal later.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ