linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 0/3] Add support for ESM

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 1 May 2023 12:05:49 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@...com>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        jdelvare@...e.com, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     nm@...com, vigneshr@...com, u-kumar1@...com, kristo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 0/3] Add support for ESM

On 25/04/2023 16:34, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 4/25/23 01:49, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
>> Hi Guenter
>>
>> On 24/04/23 20:27, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On 4/24/23 03:50, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
>>>> Resending as no major changes, commit subject change only.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe you consider changing the subject of the bindings from "misc"
>>> to "hwmon" as not being a major change, but it made me aware that you
>>> are trying to sneak bindings which in my opinion don't belong there
>>> into the hwmon bindings directory. This is not a hardware monitoring
>>> device, it doesn't have anything to do with hardware monitoring, and the
>>> bindings do not belong into bindings/hwmon/.
>>>
>>
>> I understand, it's a thin line across which I pushed ESM into hwmon; my reasoning was ESM also actively looks for signals that it aggregates, and is overall monitoring the device health. But if there was an option, in order of fitting: fault/ > misc/ > hwmon/
>>
> 
> That is really a stretch. It doesn't monitor anything. It is a signal
> routing mechanism.
> 
> With that logic every transistor would be a hardware monitoring device.

Then let's move it to misc/ as I don't have other ideas for the placement.

Best regards,
Krzysztof