netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC v2 0/6] introduce infrastructure for support of switch chip datapath

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:	Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:00:12 +0000
From:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, nhorman@...driver.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
	dborkman@...hat.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com, jesse@...ira.com,
	pshelar@...ira.com, azhou@...ira.com, ben@...adent.org.uk,
	stephen@...workplumber.org, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
	vyasevic@...hat.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
	john.r.fastabend@...el.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
	sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
	roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, linville@...driver.com,
	dev@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC v2 0/6] introduce infrastructure for support
 of switch chip datapath

On 03/27/14 at 07:17am, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On 03/27/14 07:02, Thomas Graf wrote:
> >But wouldn't you want to introduce an additional ndo to
> >cover these?
> 
> We could - I just find it distracting at the current thread
> of discussion (the openwrt folks for example dont need any
> or most of that).
> 
> >What speaks against going with what Jiri proposes and adjust
> >& extend as needed as we go along?
> >
> 
> I was hoping we knock these issue one at a time. The noise right
> now is around ports and stacking of ports etc. Which in my
> opinion is an easier topic to handle.
> Jiri's patches on this can always come back in the discussion
> later.

It seems like we reached pretty good consensus on the model. What
remaining issues do you see with the port model proposed in v2?
--
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