netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] ice: use GNSS subsystem instead of TTY

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2023 09:41:01 -0800
From:   Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
        <pabeni@...hat.com>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
        <johan@...nel.org>, <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
        Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacinski@...el.com>,
        Michal Michalik <michal.michalik@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] ice: use GNSS subsystem instead of TTY

On 1/3/2023 10:11 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 03:10:47PM -0800, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>> From: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
>>
>> Previously support for GNSS was implemented as a TTY driver, it allowed
>> to access GNSS receiver on /dev/ttyGNSS_<bus><func>.
>>
>> Use generic GNSS subsystem API instead of implementing own TTY driver.
>> The receiver is accessible on /dev/gnss<id>. In case of multiple
>> receivers in the OS, correct device can be found by enumerating either:
>> - /sys/class/net/<eth port>/device/gnss/
>> - /sys/class/gnss/gnss<id>/device/
>>
>> User expecting onboard GNSS receiver support is required to enable
>> CONFIG_GNSS=y/m in kernel config.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacinski@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Michalik <michal.michalik@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
>> ---
>> Based on feedback from:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20220829220049.333434-4-anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com/
> 
> Why is this "RFC"?  What is left to be done to it to warrant that
> marking?

net-next was closed at this time, so I sent it with RFC during that 
window to get any feedback to make needed changes before it opened again.

There are a couple of patches for net that will cause merge conflicts 
with this so I'm trying to get those in before submitting the non-RFC 
version of this to minimize conflicts. I'm hoping to submit this next week.

Thanks,
Tony