linux-kernel - Re: Insanely high baud rates

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:   Wed, 10 Oct 2018 13:20:48 -0700
From:   hpa@...or.com
To:     Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:     linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Insanely high baud rates

On October 10, 2018 1:17:17 PM PDT, Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 12:19:04 -0700
>"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>
>> [Resending to a wider audience]
>> 
>> In trying to get the termios2 interface actually implemented in
>glibc,
>> the question came up if we will ever care about baud rates in excess
>of
>> 4 Gbps, even in the relatively remote future.
>
>Even RS485 at 4MBits involves deep magic. I think we are fairly safe.
>Not
>only that but our entire tty layer isn't capable of sustaining anything
>even remotely in that range.
>
>I think its non issue.
>
>Alan

I'm mostly wondering if it is worth future-proofing for new transports. It sounds like we can have a consensus on leaving the upper 4 bits of the speed fields reserved, but leave the details of implementation for the future?
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.