linux-kernel - RE: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [PATCH] Staging: silabs si4455 serial driver

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: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAM7AkQxKEJRHh2BgMNSTrQkBAExvbAW64DNBoXXP8CRioZMAAAAzfOEAABAAAADw4WwGItHrQ5iFlvxJ/JFMAQAAAAA=@ministro.hu>
Date:   Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:57:01 +0100
From:   "Info" <info@...istro.hu>
To:     "'Greg Kroah-Hartman'" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     "'Rob Herring'" <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>
Subject: RE: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [PATCH] Staging: silabs si4455 serial driver

> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 12:09:58PM +0100, Info wrote:
> > This is a serial port driver for
> > Silicon Labs Si4455 Sub-GHz transciver.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: József Horváth <info@...istro.hu>
>
> Note, your From: line does not match this line, so I can't take this.
>
> But:
>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/staging/serial/silabs,si4455.txt |   39 +

I'll fix this, sorry.

>
> staging drivers need to be self-contained, so this should be here.  It needs to be reviewed by the DT maintainers when moving out of staging.
>
> > index 000000000000..aee5c7613b31
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/si4455/TODO
> > @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
> > +TODO:
> > +        - add variable packet length support
> > +        - add firmware patching support in case of Si4455-C2A
>
> Why are these a requirement to get it out of staging?  Why go into staging at all?  Why not go into the 'real' part of the kernel directly?
> What is keeping that from happening today?
>
> These look like new features that you can add later, and shouldn't be a requirement for acceptance into the normal part of the kernel for this driver.  Why have you not tried doing that first?

Yes, you are right. The TODO list is for me, and the driver can get out of staging without these.
The curent state of the driver is completly covers my requirements, but I would complete these functions int he future.
The main reason for not implementing the firmware patching feature is, currently I have no Si4455-C2A in my development system.
My product is based on Si4455-B1A, but I'm waiting for the Si4455-C2A module.

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h


Üdvözlettel / Best regards:
József Horváth