linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] M

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, 24 Oct 2018 13:03:52 +0530
From:   Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com>
To:     Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>, <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        <mkl@...gutronix.de>, <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] M_CAN Framework rework

Hi Dan,

On Thursday 18 October 2018 01:51 AM, Dan Murphy wrote:
> Bump
> 
> On 10/10/2018 09:20 AM, Dan Murphy wrote:
>> All
>>
>> This patch series creates a m_can core framework that devices can register
>> to.  The m_can core manages the Bosch IP and CAN frames.  Each device that
>> is registered is responsible for managing device specific functions.
>>
>> This rewrite was suggested in a device driver submission for the TCAN4x5x
>> device
>> Reference upstream post:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/984163/
>>
>> For instance the TCAN device is a SPI device that uses a specific data payload to
>> determine writes and reads.  In addition the device has a reset input as well
>> as a wakeup pin.  The register offset of the m_can registers differs and must
>> be set by the device attached to the core.
>>
>> The m_can core will use iomapped writes and reads as the default mechanism for
>> writing and reading.  The device driver can provide over rides for this.
>>
>> This patch series is not complete as it does not handle the CAN interrupts
>> nor can perform a CAN write.  If this patch series is deemed acceptable I will
>> finish debugging the driver and post a non RFC series.
>>
>> Finally I did attempt to reduce the first patch with various git format patch
>> directives but none seemed to reduce the patch.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> Dan Murphy (3):
>>   can: m_can: Create m_can core to leverage common code
>>   dt-bindings: can: tcan4x5x: Add DT bindings for TCAN4x5X driver
>>   can: tcan4x5x: Add tcan4x5x driver to the kernel
>>
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt  |   34 +
>>  drivers/net/can/m_can/Kconfig                 |   18 +
>>  drivers/net/can/m_can/Makefile                |    4 +-
>>  drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c                 | 1683 +----------------
>>  .../net/can/m_can/{m_can.c => m_can_core.c}   |  479 +++--
>>  drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can_core.h            |  100 +
>>  drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.c              |  321 ++++
>>  7 files changed, 722 insertions(+), 1917 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt
>>  copy drivers/net/can/m_can/{m_can.c => m_can_core.c} (83%)
>>  create mode 100644 drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can_core.h
>>  create mode 100644 drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.c
>>

Patch 1/3 never arrived for me. Its not there on lkml either.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/10/611

Can you resend the complete series?

Thanks,
Faiz