linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] i2c/busses: Add i2c-icy for I2C on m68k/Amiga

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:   Thu, 15 Aug 2019 12:00:11 +0200
From:   Max Staudt <max@...as.org>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] i2c/busses: Add i2c-icy for I2C on m68k/Amiga

On 08/15/2019 09:12 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> I kept it in because i2c-elektor also exposes it in the same way, and
>> it seems useful.
> 
> Yeah, I noticed. I don't know how useful it is in practice (same for the
> getown callback) but I don't have better ideas, so let's just keep this
> to be consistent.

Well, the other option is to remove it, and then add it back once somebody complains - which is unlikely to happen. The clock parameter is PCF8584 specific anyway, and  I think removing it is a good option, as I've done the same with getown() (where in i2c-elektor, 'own' sets the PCF8584's own address).

Question is, if I remove the parameter, I'd like it to be non-destructive. Do you know of anything that can go wrong if the I2C master is running the bus on a wrong clock?

Thanks

Max