linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/6] net: ethernet: implement OPEN Alliance control transaction interface

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: <e037b12b-e592-f451-102e-61401c7ea5d0@microchip.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Sep 2023 12:36:19 +0000
From:   <Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>
To:     <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
        <pabeni@...hat.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <corbet@....net>, <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
        <rdunlap@...radead.org>, <horms@...nel.org>,
        <casper.casan@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <Horatiu.Vultur@...rochip.com>,
        <Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com>, <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>,
        <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <Thorsten.Kummermehr@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/6] net: ethernet: implement OPEN Alliance
 control transaction interface

Hi Andrew,

On 19/09/23 6:28 pm, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:13:13AM +0000, Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> On 13/09/23 7:46 am, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>>> +struct oa_tc6 {
>>>> +     struct spi_device *spi;
>>>> +     bool ctrl_prot;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> Should this be considered an opaque structure which the MAC driver
>>> should not access the members?
> 
> Opaque vs not opaque is an important design decision. If the MAC
> driver is allowed to directly access this structure, you should
> document the locking concept. If the MAC is not supposed to access it
> directly, only uses getters/setters, that also needs documenting, and
> maybe even make it a void * in the MAC driver.
Sorry that I missed to reply in the previous email. Thanks for the 
details on this topic.

Yes, as "struct oa_tc6" and its members are not or going to be accessed 
in the MAC driver, I will consider this as an opaque structure and 
declare it as void *opaque_oa_tc6 in the MAC driver private structure 
"struct lan865x_priv" and will pass to the APIs exported from oa_tc6.c lib.

Is my understanding correct?

Best Regards,
Parthiban V
> 
>        Andrew