linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 00/20] gpio: cdev: add uAPI v2

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: <20200910141815.GW1891694@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:18:15 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Cc:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/20] gpio: cdev: add uAPI v2

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 04:12:08PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:09 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 11:28:13AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 3:35 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> wrote:

...

> > > I personally like v6 more. The code is more elegant and we've also
> > > tried limiting GPIO chardev features before and now we're doing v2 so
> > > let's not make the same mistake twice. :)
> > >
> > > I'll try to review v6 in detail later today.
> >
> > Let me briefly review to this. Can you remind which patch has a top level
> > description of what features are provided in comparison to uAPI v1?
> > (Btw, do we have some kind of comparison table?)
> 
> We are now at v8 for this series. The cover letter contains a lot of
> info and patch 4/20 defining the uAPI header explains v2 even more. I
> think these are the most important parts. Any implementation details
> can be fixed later as opposed to the API itself.

Right, thanks for pointers!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko