netdev - Re: [RFC] wwan: add a new WWAN subsystem

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:   Tue, 25 Feb 2020 16:39:00 +0100
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>, m.chetan.kumar@...el.com,
        Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] wwan: add a new WWAN subsystem

On Tue, 2020-02-25 at 16:15 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:

> Looking at it bottom up, is the WWAN device itself made up of multiple
> devices? Are the TTYs separate drivers to the packet moving engines?

Possibly, yes, it depends a bit.

> They have there own USB end points, and could just be standard CDC
> ACM?

Yeah, for a lot of USB devices that's indeed the case.

> driver/base/component.c could be useful for bringing together these
> individual devices to form the whole WWAN device.

Huh, I was unaware of this, I'll take a look!

A very brief look suggests that it wants to have a driver for the whole
thing in the end, which isn't really true here, but perhaps we could
"make one up" and have that implement the userspace API. I need to take
a closer look, thanks for the pointer.

> Plus you need to avoid confusion by not adding another "component
> framework" which means something totally different to the existing
> component framework.

:)

johannes