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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <c1b783b0-9773-17f5-d043-35e28f7797f0@suse.de> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:00:09 +0200 From: Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de> To: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>, "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net> Cc: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, mark.rutland@....com, 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 Am 24.04.19 um 12:26 schrieb Oliver Hartkopp: > Thanks Enrico! > > On 24.04.19 11:40, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: >> On 18.04.19 19:34, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote: >> >>> If you have a fieldbus device you want to add to mainline Linux, and> >>> you wish to piggy-back onto the fieldbus_dev subsystem, then we can> >> discuss fieldbus API changes/additions/improvements during the> patch >> review stage. >> With those cases, piggy-backing wouldn't make much sense, as their >> semantics is pretty different. >> >> My whole point here was just that it shouldn't be called "fieldbus", >> but iec61158 instead. >> > > Full ACK! > > The Controller Area Network also belongs to the class of field busses > and has its own networking subsystem in linux/net/can. > > So using a 'class' of communication protocols as naming scheme doesn't > fit IMHO. And - again - NACK. Calling a subsystem just iec61158 is going to hide what it is and stand in the way of development of this niche system. I asked Enrico to come up with a better naming proposal such as having iec61158 as subfolder to human-readable fieldbus, but I did not see him coming up with any such new proposals apart from repeating this name. Also please read Sven's comment again: It you don't like the current naming you'll need to post follow-up patches, as v11 of this subsystem has been merged into staging. No complaint about piggy-backing on v10 is going to change that fact now! https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git/tree/drivers/staging/fieldbus?h=staging-next And since we're at it, Enrico's response to me just threw around a bunch of acronyms instead of explaining which ones have an _actual_ conflict with this subsystem - my point precisely was that if they use sockets or ttys then there's no real conflict apart from lots of things classifying as "fieldbus". Regards, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists