[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5628E323.1010808@iogearbox.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:22:43 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
CC: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
davem@...emloft.net, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] bpf: add support for persistent maps/progs
On 10/22/2015 12:44 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
...
> all users) When you have to hack drivers/base/core.c to get there it
> should have been a warning sign that something is wrong with
> this cdev approach.
Hmm, you know, this had nothing to do with it, merely to save ~20 LoC
that I can do just as well inside BPF framework. No changes in driver
API needed.
>> I've read the discussion passively and my take away is that, frankly,
>> I think the differences are somewhat minor. Both architectures can
>> scale to what we need. Both will do the job. I'm slightly worried about
>> exposing uAPI as a FS, I think that didn't work too well for sysfs. It's
>> pretty much a define the format once and never touch it again kind of
>> deal.
>
> It's even worse in cdev style since it piggy backs on sysfs.
I don't mind with what approach we're going in the end, but this kind
of discussion is really tiring, and not going anywhere.
Lets just make a beer call, so we can hash out a way forward that works
for everyone.
On that note: cheers! ;)
Daniel
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists