linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] serial: Fix support for UPF_SPD

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:   Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:42:03 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>,
        "open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] serial: Fix support for UPF_SPD_* flags

On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:20 PM Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Friday 08 July 2022 15:51:01 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 03:26:21PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Friday 08 July 2022 15:07:43 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 10:48:40AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > > On Friday 22 April 2022 16:28:06 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

...

> > > > I'm not saying remove them, I'm saying let us not add any more
> > > > dependancies on them in order to keep new applications from ever wanting
> > > > to use them.
> > >
> > > Last time you wrote to remove them. Now saying not to remove them. So I
> > > do not understand you now.

There was a _new_ addition of the ugly SPD_CUST, that's what I believe
Greg opposes to. And I support that.

> > I'm sorry, I am totally lost.
>
> So look what you have wrote? Who is lost here is me.
>
> > How about starting over and resubmitting
> > the changes you want and we can go from there.
>
> What to resubmit? I do not understand you. In case you lost emails or
> accidentally removed them, you can look at them in archive, not? I hope
> that you do not want me to copy+paste all existing patches with all your
> quotes on them which you wrote into new emails.

That change that adds the new user of SPD_CUST?

In any case the best summary about BOTHER I ever read is this [1] (and
an initial steps in picocom [2]). And I believe that instead of
SPD_CUST we should get rid (or at least minimize) the problems with
BOTHER in user space.

[1]: https://github.com/npat-efault/picocom/blob/master/termios2.txt
[2]: https://github.com/jmesmon/picocom/issues/2



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko