LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Hurley <>
To: Stefan Richter <>
Cc: Clemens Ladisch <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging/fwserial: use correct vendor/version IDs
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:00:14 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150203094425.2def7f79@kant>

On 02/03/2015 03:44 AM, Stefan Richter wrote:
> On Feb 02 Peter Hurley wrote:
>> On 01/28/2015 03:07 PM, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
>>> The driver was using the vendor ID 0xd00d1e from the FireWire core.
>>> However, this ID was not registered, and invalid.
>>> Instead, use the vendor/version IDs that now are officially assigned to
>>> firewire-serial:
>> That's great that we have official OUIs now, but I have to NACK this
>> patch as is.
>> The problem is a host with the old OUIs will not recognize a remote
>> unit with the new OUIs, and vice versa.
>> Even though the new ids could be added to the unit driver's id_table,
>> (which would let hosts with the new OUI connect to either OUI remote),
>> it wouldn't let 3.19- hosts connect to 3.20+ hosts.
> Actually there are no 3.19- hosts that speak fwserial; there are only
> staging hosts that do so.  So, with this patch added, certain staging
> hosts would become unable to talk with certain other staging hosts (and
> with future Linux hosts, once fwserial gets merged upstream).

The breakage seems gratuitous especially considering the existing OUI
has been in use for a decade.

> Both fwserial-the-implementation and fwserial-the-protocol are your own,
> and as yet unmerged.

I've been waiting for you to work through the patch backlog from Feb and
Mar of last year before sending you more patches to merge fwserial.

>  (In addition, there does not yet exist a second
> implementation, AFAIK.)  So I'd say there is still opportunity to improve
> the protocol even in incompatible ways if justified.  Switching to
> valid identifiers may very well be such a justifiable change.

I would appreciate you sharing any suggestions for improving the protocol.

While I concede the protocol is not perfect, I'm struggling to see how
changing the OUI improves it.

Peter Hurley

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-03 14:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <>
2015-01-28 20:07 ` Clemens Ladisch
2015-01-29  9:44   ` Stefan Richter
2015-02-02 22:08   ` Peter Hurley
2015-02-03  8:44     ` Stefan Richter
2015-02-03 14:00       ` Peter Hurley [this message]
2015-02-03 21:22         ` Stefan Richter
2015-02-07  9:10   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] staging/fwserial: use correct vendor/version IDs' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).