netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 RFC 7/8] devlink: Add a generic port parameter

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:   Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:18:39 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, michael.chan@...adcom.com, jiri@...lanox.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 RFC 7/8] devlink: Add a generic port
 parameter

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 14:16:47 +0530, Vasundhara Volam wrote:
> wake-on-lan - Enables Wake on Lan for this port. If enabled,
> the controller asserts a wake pin based on the wake-on-lan type.
> 
> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>

As explained previously I think it's a very bad idea to add existing
configuration options to devlink, just because devlink has the ability
to persist the setting in NVM.  Especially that for WoL you have to get
the link up so you potentially have all link config stuff as well.  And
that n-tuple filters are one of the WoL options, meaning we'd need the
ability to persist n-tuple filters via devlink.

Your effort would be far better spent helping with migrating ethtool to
netlink, and allowing persisting there.

I have not heard any reason why devlink is a better fit.  I can imagine
you're just doing it here because it's less effort for you since
ethtool is not yet migrated.

So I'm opposed, let's call it a nack.