linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 3/7] anybus-s: support the Arcx anybus controller

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: <3103f45a-facf-89a3-8a36-84507c570909@metux.net>
Date:   Wed, 17 Apr 2019 10:39:03 +0200
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To:     Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, mark.rutland@....com,
        Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        treding@...dia.com, David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        noralf@...nnes.org, johan@...nel.org,
        Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>, michal.vokac@...ft.com,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, john.garry@...wei.com,
        geert+renesas@...der.be, robin.murphy@....com,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
        sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com, icenowy@...c.io,
        Stuart Yoder <stuyoder@...il.com>,
        "J. Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, maxime.ripard@...tlin.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 3/7] anybus-s: support the Arcx anybus controller

On 16.04.19 23:23, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:

Hi,

> Well yes, we could treat it as an mfd device, with a common register accessor,> which registers anybus-s host and adc drivers, all selectable via>
Kconfig / defconfig... But that's a lot of extra code just to handle one
single> bit in a register, which is a boolean input.> > Can be done but
is it worth it?
hmm, I think the main question here is clean separation between
subsystems - devices that span multiple subsystems, IMHO, fall
into the category "mfd".

separate drivers probably don't make much sense here, but maybe
a CONFIG_ flag for disabling this functionality ?

>> Does this power read-out involve some CAN traffic, or is it just
>> fetching from some card that just happens to be some CAN interface ?
>> (IOW: is cansocket needed for that ?)
> 
> It is purely a boolean input. The boolean output of a voltage monitor chip.
> When our hardware is assembled, the voltage monitor input is connected
> to a signal which indicates the CAN status. In theory, it could be connected
> to the factory's light switch. It would then read out the status of the factory
> floor lights. It has no CAN functionality whatsoever.

hmm, wouldn't the input subsystem be more appropriate for that ?


--mtx

-- 
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287