netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH 00/15] eth: fbnic: Add network driver for Meta Platforms Host Network Interface

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, 4 Apr 2024 21:08:43 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>, Jiri Pirko
 <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
 linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@...com>,
 davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 00/15] eth: fbnic: Add network driver for Meta
 Platforms Host Network Interface

On 4/4/24 9:37 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 17:24:03 +0200 Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> Given the discussion going on in the thread "mlx5 ConnectX control
>> misc driver", you also plan to show you don't need such a misc driver?
> 
> To the extent to which it is possible to prove an in-existence
> of something :) Since my argument that Meta can use _vendor_ devices
> without resorting to "misc drivers" doesn't convince them, I doubt
> this data point would help.
> 

When this device gets widely deployed and you have the inevitable
production problems (inevitable in this sense this is designed,
implemented and deployed by humans who make mistakes and then S/W has to
compensate for the quirks), you can see whether it is easy to
completely, sanely and efficiently debug those problems solely with
extensions to open source tools.

But, I am guessing that is still 1+ years away before you will know.