netdev - Re: [PATCH v11 2/7] anybus-s: support HMS Anybus-S bus

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:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:44:50 -0400
From:   Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
Cc:     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 v11 2/7] anybus-s: support HMS Anybus-S bus

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:28 AM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
<lkml@...ux.net> wrote:
>
> But: I'd rather call it it "iec61158" instead of fieldbus", as there're
> lots of different fieldbus types (eg. MVB has pretty different semantics
> than iec61158)
>

I agree that correct naming is very important.
In this case however, we can't let the perfect get in the way of the good.
This subsystem has a single user right now (me) and that can change
only if others can discover and understand it. And at this stage, simple
is best.

At this point we don't know yet where the API might possibly go.
It might evolve into something broader that includes IEC61158 as
just one aspect.

If and when we mature and get more users/stakeholders, we can then
look at changing to more specific naming. Definitely before coming out
of staging/.

Greg KH has accepted the v11 patch set, so at this stage we can make
changes only by circulating patches on the mailing list. Would you like
me to post patches for anybus-s documentation / making the
regulator optional? Or would you like to have a go at that yourself?

Sven