linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: devices: add AT24 eeprom support

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:   Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:44:50 +0100
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Miquel Raynal" <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        "Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     "Marco Felsch" <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>,
        "Richard Weinberger" <richard@....at>,
        "Vignesh Raghavendra" <vigneshr@...com>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Pengutronix Kernel Team" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "Jean Delvare" <jdelvare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: devices: add AT24 eeprom support

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023, at 17:47, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> brgl@...ev.pl wrote on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 10:10:28 +0100:
>> Though if I'm being honest - I would prefer a single driver with
>> backwards compatibility. Have you estimated the effort it would take
>> to abstract both nvmem and mtd?
>
> Also agreed :-)

+1

I think this particularly makes sense in the light the other
at24 driver that was recently removed in commit 0113a99b8a75
("eeprom: Remove deprecated legacy eeprom driver").

The other problem with having two drivers is the need to
arbitrate between them, e.g. when you have a machine with
two at24 devices but want to use one of each for the two
subsystems. This does not really work with our DT probing
logic at the moment.

     Arnd