linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] spi: Add the SPI daisy chain support.

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:   Tue, 7 Jul 2020 13:06:01 +0200
From:   Adrian Fiergolski <adrian.fiergolski@...tree3d.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] spi: Add the SPI daisy chain support.


On 07.07.2020 12:25, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:57:53PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 6:18 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> It would really help to have an example of how a client device will use
>>> this, right now it's a bit hard to follow.  Overall it feels like this
>>> should be better abstracted, right now there's lots of ifdefs throughout
>>> the code which make things unclear and also seem like they're going to
>>> be fragile long term since realistically very few systems will be using
>>> this.
>> Can't the ifdefs be avoided by implementing this as a new SPI controller?
>> I.e. the daisy chain driver will operate as a slave of the parent SPI
>> controller,
>> but will expose a new SPI bus to the daisy-chained slaves.
> Yes, that might work.  I do worry about locking issues with having a SPI
> controller connected via SPI but we mostly only lock at the controller
> level so it's probably fine.  Not sure how this would perform either.

I see your point here. I could evaluate how complicated it would be to
abstract the spi-daisy_chain driver as an SPI controller for its nodes.

Regards,

Adrian