linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] timecounter: Add helper for reconstructing partial timestamps

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: <20190529044059.pp36ol5ms6a7w6z5@localhost>
Date:   Tue, 28 May 2019 21:40:59 -0700
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:     John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] timecounter: Add helper for reconstructing
 partial timestamps

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 07:14:22PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> Hrm. Is this actually generic? Would it make more sense to have the
> specific implementations with this quirk implement this in their
> read() handler? If not, why?

Strongly agree that this workaround should stay in the driver.  After
all, we do not want to encourage HW designers to continue in this way.

Thanks,
Richard