netdev - Re: [patch net-next 1/9] Introduce devlink infrastructure

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:56:14 +0100
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Yuval Mintz <Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"idosch@...lanox.com" <idosch@...lanox.com>,
	"eladr@...lanox.com" <eladr@...lanox.com>,
	"yotamg@...lanox.com" <yotamg@...lanox.com>,
	"ogerlitz@...lanox.com" <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	"yishaih@...lanox.com" <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
	"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
	"sean.hefty@...el.com" <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
	"hal.rosenstock@...il.com" <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
	"eugenia@...lanox.com" <eugenia@...lanox.com>,
	"roopa@...ulusnetworks.com" <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	"nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com" <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	"hadarh@...lanox.com" <hadarh@...lanox.com>,
	"jhs@...atatu.com" <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	"john.fastabend@...il.com" <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	"jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	"brouer@...hat.com" <brouer@...hat.com>,
	"ivecera@...hat.com" <ivecera@...hat.com>,
	"rami.rosen@...el.com" <rami.rosen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 1/9] Introduce devlink infrastructure

Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 08:02:32AM CET, Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com wrote:
>> + * An overall lock guarding every operation comming from userspace.
>> + * If also guards devlink devices list and it is taken when
>> + * driver registers/unregisters it.
>Several typos in comment.

Already fixed in v2.

>
>> +static void devlink_notify(struct devlink *devlink, enum
>> +devlink_command cmd) {
>...
>> +	WARN_ON(cmd != DEVLINK_CMD_NEW && cmd !=
>> DEVLINK_CMD_DEL);
>Given this should never happen, shouldn't this be ONCE?

Given this should never happen and only warns the developer fiddling
with this, I don't think it matters.


>
>> +static void devlink_port_notify(struct devlink_port *devlink_port,
>...
>> +	WARN_ON(cmd != DEVLINK_CMD_PORT_NEW && cmd !=
>> DEVLINK_CMD_PORT_DEL);
>Likewise
>
>> +static void __devlink_port_type_set(struct devlink_port *devlink_port,
>...
>> +	devlink_port_notify(devlink_port, DEVLINK_CMD_PORT_NEW); }
>Why is this PORT_NEW? Shouldn't it be PORT_SET?
>Also, curly bracers are repeatedly on last line of function [if this file].
>Is this by design?

SET is only for userspace->kernel messages. NEW is for reporting events
back. This is consistend with rest of the netlink messages out there,
including rtnl and nl80211