netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] e1000e,igb,ixgbe: add registers etc. printout code just before resetting adapters

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:	Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:36:14 -0800
From:	Laurent Chavey <chavey@...gle.com>
To:	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Cc:	Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
	"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	Koki Sanagi <sanagi.koki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>,
	"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] e1000e,igb,ixgbe: add registers etc. printout code 
	just before resetting adapters

Taku,

I like the idea of adding debugging support. While using syslog does provide
a "easier" way to get the output out, I am wondering if it would be
worse the while
to try to add a generic debug interface (via ethtool / netlink) that
each driver would
then support.

If using syslog is the choosen way, then having the feature on by
default may not
be wanted.


On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Jeff Kirsher
<jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 01:16 -0700, Taku Izumi wrote:
>> Hi Jesse,
>>
>> > I have a counter proposal to make, here is a (incomplete) patch that we
>> > use all the time to debug tx hangs.  This example is for e1000e.  We are
>> > trying to avoid changes with other users' copyright to some of the files
>> > in our drivers so that we can ship them under multiple license.  We would
>> > much prefer something like this to be used, can you review?
>>
>>   I haven't understood yet about the reason we have to avoid changing some
>>   files. Are there any files (header files?) we can't modify?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Taku Izumi
>>
>
> To answer your question, no there are no files you can't submit patches
> to.  We do have some common files which are used/shared amongst all of
> our drivers which are used for initializing and/or bring up the
> hardware, so when a patch is submitted to our drivers which changes our
> "shared code" our first question is "Is this change necessary for all of
> our drivers?" and if the answer is no, then we take a look at what
> changes can be made in the code which is not shared among our other
> drivers.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Jeff
>
>
--
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