netdev - RE: [PATCH 1/3] ixgbe: Add Data Center Bridging netlink listener for DCB runtime changes.

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:	Fri, 2 May 2008 13:08:21 -0700
From:	"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
To:	"Jeff Garzik" <jgarzik@...ox.com>
Cc:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] ixgbe: Add Data Center Bridging netlink listener for DCB runtime changes.

> Seems to me we don't want each driver supporting this 
> technology to create their own netlink interface...

Definitely reasonable.  However, even with an ethtool interface, there's
going to be a good chunk of development.  Is the issue just the
non-generic netlink family we're implementing, or is it something else?

> This seems more appropriate via ethtool, or ethtool-netlink 
> (Thomas Graf posted an RFC)

Oddly enough, we made the decision early on in development not to use
ethtool.  We would be adding a rather large number of ioctls for this
technology, and our initial thoughts were that the community would
reject that large of a change to the ethtool interface.

I'm very interested in the ethtool-netlink interface, which would
probably help us get rid of the ixgbe_is_ixgbe() call in the DCB driver.

Aside from the netlink issues, how does the rest of the code appear?
Thanks for the feedback Jeff.

Cheers,
-PJ Waskiewicz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html