linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] platform/chrome: cros_ec

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: <CAB2FV=614YLrsj6yPxRd1uVsF4n3EabLoXwL1Mtrk9Eg+5Mo9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 08:08:24 -0700
From: Pavan Holla <pholla@...omium.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>, Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, 
	Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>, Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, 
	Abhishek Pandit-Subedi <abhishekpandit@...omium.org>, chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] platform/chrome: cros_ec_ucsi: Implement UCSI PDC driver

Hi Dmitry,

Thanks for the review.

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 8:32 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> wrote:
> While it's fine to use platform/chrome for platform drivers, please
> place drivers which have a subsystem into the subsystem dir. I think we
> don't want to hunt UCSI implementations all over the codebase. Please
> use drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ location for your driver. This also removes
> a need for a global header.

I agree with your assessment that drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ is a good
location for the driver currently. However, the driver is still in
early stages of development. We may have to account for PDC/ EC quirks
(we have multiple vendors), add FW update functionality outside the
UCSI spec, or add PDC logging functionality. While I'd like to write
separate drivers for those, some of this functionality will need to
acquire a lock over communication to the PDC. Even if I were to write
separate drivers for new functionality related to the PDC, maybe it's
better for all ChromeOS PDC related drivers to reside in the same
location. I am not sure what form this driver will take in the near
future, thus I would prefer to keep it in platform/chrome. Maybe
cros_ec_ucsi isn't the best name here, cros_ec_pdc probably conveys
the intention better.

Thanks,
Pavan