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: <CAGngYiXx2eKR7DnHm9sNWVC+B1F2N6uUNXqZAq4rey2yjU1RyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:56:24 -0400
From:   Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, mark.rutland@....com,
        Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        treding@...dia.com, David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        noralf@...nnes.org, johan@...nel.org,
        Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>, michal.vokac@...ft.com,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, john.garry@...wei.com,
        geert+renesas@...der.be, robin.murphy@....com,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
        sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com, icenowy@...c.io,
        Stuart Yoder <stuyoder@...il.com>,
        "J. Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, maxime.ripard@...tlin.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/7] Add Fieldbus subsystem + support HMS Profinet card

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:49 PM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
<lkml@...ux.net> wrote:
>
>
> Maybe I'm a bit beaurocratic here, but I really believe that precise
> naming is important, eg. for avoiding potential conflicts w/ different
> fieldbus classes (eg. mvb) that might come in the future.

I named the subsystem 'fieldbus_dev' because it handles fieldbus
devices, not controllers. Granted, it's in the drivers/staging/fieldbus
directory, but that's because people objected to the verbosity of
fieldbus_dev. In the C code, it's all fieldbus_dev.

>
> By the way: any special reason for doing this via device instead of
> socket (like we have w/ can) ?
>

A fieldbus_dev device communicates with its controller through a section
of shared memory (process memory). It just felt more logical to model
this as a device which acts like a file. When you read/write the file,
you read/write the process memory underneath.

Sven

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ