netdev - Re: [PATCH] USB host CDC Phonet network interface driver

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:	Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:31:08 +0200
From:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To:	"Rémi Denis-Courmont" 
	<remi.denis-courmont@...ia.com>
Cc:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	ext Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB host CDC Phonet network interface driver

Am Freitag, 24. Juli 2009 14:14:17 schrieb Rémi Denis-Courmont:
> On Friday 24 July 2009 15:01:19 ext Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 22. Juli 2009 11:15:34 schrieb Marcel Holtmann:
> > > > > The AT stuff is really problematic. Look at the hoops ISDN and
> > > > > software modem drivers go through to emulate AT commands. I know
> > > > > even of a CDC-ACM modem which can't deal with AT commands inline
> > > > > (that's within spec). It seems to me we should have a modem API in
> > > > > kernel.
> > > >
> > > > For devices which don't deal in AT commands probably but for devices
> > > > whose firmware provides an AT command interface over serial I would
> > > > disagree.
> > >
> > > I fully agree here. Even if you think you get AT commands under
> > > control, you really won't in the end. That standard is so wildly
> > > mis-interpreted that it is not even funny anymore.
> >
> > For these devices we could at least separate the data channel from the
> > control channel.
>
> "These" as in AT devices? You want a line discipline to multiplex AT
> commands inspite of PPP? I wonder if that'd work.

No, I was thinking of having two full devices, a data channel and a control
channel for devices that really talk AT commands natively.

	Regards
		Oliver

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html