netdev - Re: [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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 14 Jan 2023 08:03:15 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
        edumazet@...gle.com,
        Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, johan@...nel.org, jirislaby@...nel.org,
        Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
        Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacinski@...el.com>,
        Michal Michalik <michal.michalik@...el.com>,
        Gurucharan G <gurucharanx.g@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] ice: use GNSS subsystem instead of TTY

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 01:48:52PM -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/

You are saying what you are doing, but not anything about _why_ this
change is the correct one.

You are also breaking a user/kernel api here, how is existing users
going to handle the tty device node going away?  What userspace tools
are going to break and how are you going to handle that?

While overall I like the idea here, you aren't really providing any
justification for it at all.

thanks,

greg k-h