netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/7] devlink: Add permanent config parameter get/set operations

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, 18 Oct 2017 09:14:35 -0400
From:   Steve Lin <steven.lin1@...adcom.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] devlink: Add permanent config parameter get/set operations

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
> Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 02:39:09PM CEST, steven.lin1@...adcom.com wrote:
>>On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>>> Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:44:23PM CEST, steven.lin1@...adcom.com wrote:
>>> Steve. As I originally requested, could you please split this to:
>>> 1) single patch adding config get/set commands, without any config attributes
>>> 2) single patch per config attribute - please don't add them in bulk.
>>>    We also need very strict description for every single attribute so
>>>    other vendors know what it is and can re-use it. There is need to
>>>    avoid duplication here. Also, please send just few attribites in the
>>>    first run, not like 40 you are sending now. Impossible to review.
>>
>>I broke the patch set up into functional blocks of attributes, in
>>order to avoid having ~40 patches of just a couple lines each.  But, I
>>will split further for each individual attribute, and just submit a
>>few initially, per your request.
>>
>>>
>>> Also, why didn't you put it into nested attribute we were discussing?
>>>
>>
>>I thought I did :) , using the DPIPE_HEADERS nested attribute as an
>>example.  I'll reach out to you off-list to understand what I'm
>>missing.
>
> I missed that. But you need a separate attr enum as well.
>

I did have this as the nested attr enum in the original patch:

        /* Permanent Configuration Parameters */
        DEVLINK_ATTR_PERM_CFG,                          /* nested */

However, I only used the nested construct in the response from kernel
to userspace, not in the request from userspace to kernel.  (This was
based on looking at the various DPIPE_* nested attributes as
examples.)

Thinking about it after seeing your comment, I'm thinking I should
also use the nested attribute construct in the original request from
userspace to kernel as well, although I didn't see any previous
examples of this in devlink.

So I'll plan to use nesting in that direction as well.

Thanks,
Steve