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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 09:22:05 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> Cc: "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>, stephen@...workplumber.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, kubakici@...pl, jasowang@...hat.com, loseweigh@...il.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 2/4] net: Introduce generic bypass module Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 06:08:58AM CEST, mst@...hat.com wrote: >On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:32:06PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >> >> > With regards to alternate names for 'active', you suggested 'stolen', but i >> >> >> > am not too happy with it. >> >> >> > netvsc uses vf_netdev, are you OK with this? Or another option is 'passthru' >> >> >> No. The netdev could be any netdevice. It does not have to be a "VF". >> >> >> I think "stolen" is quite appropriate since it describes the modus >> >> >> operandi. The bypass master steals some netdevice according to some >> >> >> match. >> >> >> >> >> >> But I don't insist on "stolen". Just sounds right. >> >> > >> >> >We are adding VIRTIO_NET_F_BACKUP as a new feature bit to enable this feature, So i think >> >> >'backup' name is consistent. >> >> >> >> It perhaps makes sense from the view of virtio device. However, as I >> >> described couple of times, for master/slave device the name "backup" is >> >> highly misleading. >> > >> >virtio is the backup. You are supposed to use another >> >(typically passthrough) device, if that fails use virtio. >> >It does seem appropriate to me. If you like, we can >> >change that to "standby". Active I don't like either. "main"? >> >> Sounds much better, yes. > >Excuse me, which of the versions are better in your eyes? standby is okay. main/primary is fine too. > > >> >> > >> >In fact would failover be better than bypass? >> >> Also, much better. >>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists