netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] bluetooth: hci_uart: add LL protocol serdev driver 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]

Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+aM+xxbu=3v8_w9Ce+=t_pXmVWuisnckA8_8LOS-ftVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:48:52 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
Cc:     Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        "open list:BLUETOOTH DRIVERS" <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Wei Xu <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>, Eyal Reizer <eyalr@...com>,
        Satish Patel <satish.patel@...aro.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] bluetooth: hci_uart: add LL protocol serdev driver support

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 09:35 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> Turns out that the LL protocol and the TI-ST are the same thing
>> AFAICT.
>> The TI-ST adds firmware loading, GPIO control, and shared access for
>> NFC, FM radio, etc. For now, we're only implementing what is needed
>> for
>> BT. This mirrors other drivers like BCM and Intel, but uses the new
>> serdev bus.
>>
>> The firmware loading is greatly simplified by using existing
>> infrastructure to send commands. It may be a bit slower than the
>> original code using synchronous functions, but the real bottleneck is
>> likely doing firmware load at 115.2kbps.
>
> Is there no way to put the TI-specific stuff into a TI UART module
> rather than building it into the generic one?

In case it's not clear, all of HCI_LL is the TI specific part, not
just what I'm adding. So you are talking about putting each UART BT
protocol into a separate module. I'd assume that is doable, but seems
orthogonal to this patch set. I'd also assume there was some reason
that was not done already.

Rob