linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] usb: typec: Manage SVDM version

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: <20210203150121.GI1687065@kuha.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:01:21 +0200
From:   Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Kyle Tso <kyletso@...gle.com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        hdegoede@...hat.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, badhri@...gle.com,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] usb: typec: Manage SVDM version

On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 06:51:43AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Thinking about it, would it make make sense to define the functions as
> static inline ?

I (and I believe Guenter too) want to keep these structures protected
for now. If the API starts to get too bloated, then I guess I have to
reconsider that. But I don't think we are there yet.

I have been thinking about moving the USB PD negotiation details to a
separate structure that could be more accessible for everybody. That
should allow me continue to protect my precious structures. But I have
not yet put much though into that.

thanks,

-- 
heikki