netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Create common DPLL/clock configuration API

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3d2970c7-f785-edf7-2936-807cf21ec65e@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:20:44 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Vadim Fedorenko <vfedorenko@...ek.ru>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...com>, Aya Levin <ayal@...dia.com>,
        Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Create common DPLL/clock configuration API

On 6/22/22 17:57, Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
> From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...com>
> 
> Implement common API for clock/DPLL configuration and status reporting.
> The API utilises netlink interface as transport for commands and event
> notifications. This API aim to extend current pin configuration and
> make it flexible and easy to cover special configurations.

Any reasons why you are not copying the Linux common clock framework 
maintainers and not seeking to get your code included under drivers/clk/ 
where it would seem like a more natural place for it?

Is netlink really a necessary configuration interface for those devices?
-- 
Florian