linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: make "label" property optional for dsa2

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: <20170109175842.GH1862@nanopsycho>
Date:   Mon, 9 Jan 2017 18:58:42 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>,
        Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: make "label" property optional for
 dsa2

Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 06:42:07PM CET, f.fainelli@...il.com wrote:
>On 01/09/2017 08:06 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 04:45:33PM CET, vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com wrote:
>>> Hi Jiri,
>>>
>>> Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> writes:
>>>
>>>>> Extra question: shouldn't phys_port_{id,name} be switchdev attributes in
>>>>
>>>> Again, phys_port_id has nothing to do with switches. Should be removed
>>>> from dsa because its use there is incorrect.
>>>
>>> Florian, since 3a543ef just got in, can it be reverted?
>> 
>> Yes, please revert it. It is only in net-next.
>
>Maybe the use case can be understood before reverting the change. How do
>we actually the physical port number of an Ethernet switch per-port
>network device? The name is not enough, because there are plenty of
>cases where we need to manipulate a physical port number (be it just for
>informational purposes).

Like what?

Why the name is not enough? This is something propagated to userspace
and never used internally in kernel.

Btw, ndo_get_phys_port_id does not give you number, but arbitrary binary.


>
>Should we just amend the existing description of ndo_get_phys_port_id()?
>Should we introduce another ndo for that?
>-- 
>Florian