linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/8] 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: <CANFp7mX0=9qHb8_UotKjDo8rGemA7L+NGp3J+qSzBg_9Pp2CTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:42:46 -0700
From: Abhishek Pandit-Subedi <abhishekpandit@...omium.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com, tzungbi@...nel.org, jthies@...gle.com, 
	pmalani@...omium.org, akuchynski@...gle.com, 
	Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>, 
	chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] platform/chrome: cros_ec_typec: Thunderbolt support

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 10:13 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 09:25:08AM GMT, Abhishek Pandit-Subedi wrote:
> > Add support for entering and exiting Thunderbolt alt-mode using AP
> > driven alt-mode.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abhishek Pandit-Subedi <abhishekpandit@...omium.org>
> > ---
> >
> >  drivers/platform/chrome/Makefile              |   1 +
> >  drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_typec.c       |  29 +--
> >  drivers/platform/chrome/cros_typec_altmode.h  |  14 ++
> >  .../platform/chrome/cros_typec_thunderbolt.c  | 184 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  4 files changed, 216 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/platform/chrome/cros_typec_thunderbolt.c
>
> This patch looks like nearly exact 1:1 copy of the previous one. Please
> merge both altmode implementations in the same way as tcpm.c does.

It's easier for tcpm.c to have a merged implementation because it
simply forwards VDMs to the internal state machine to handle without
doing anything with them. Our implementation is closer to
ucsi/displayport.c which needs to maintain an internal state machine
for DP and TBT VDMs and respond differently.

I can merge the two but I'd like to understand intent (reduce code
duplication? reduce the number of files?). As it is, keeping the files
separate makes it easier to understand how each alt-mode operates in
my opinion.

>
> --
> With best wishes
> Dmitry