linux-kernel - Re: [RFC Patch 1/3] netpoll: add generic support for bridge and bonding devices

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]

Message-Id: <20100322.204939.146100390.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	amwang@...hat.com
Cc:	mpm@...enic.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	gospo@...hat.com, nhorman@...driver.com,
	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
	bonding-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, fubar@...ibm.com,
	jmoyer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 1/3] netpoll: add generic support for bridge and
 bonding devices

From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:13:43 +0800

> Matt Mackall wrote:
>> Seems like a lot of interface for something to be used by only a
>> couple
>> core drivers. Hopefully Dave has an opinion here.
>> 
> 
> Yeah, I worry about this too, maybe we can group those methods
> for netpoll together into another struct, and just put a pointer
> here?

This looks like it's tackled at the wrong layer, to be honest.

Teaching all of these layers about eachother's states is
going to end up being a nightmare in the end.

All of this "where is the npinfo" business can be handled
generically in net/core/dev.c I think, with none of these
callbacks.

For example, something like "if dev lacks ->npinfo, check
it's master".

Another thing, I wouldn't iterate over all devices, like I
see in the bonding poll controller method.  Just whichever
one supports netpoll you see first, use it and exit
immediately.  Don't send it to every single port, I can't
see how that might be desirable or useful.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/