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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <fb6991eb-573e-a085-9267-928c47dbdb05@egil-hjelmeland.no> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:38 +0200 From: Egil Hjelmeland <privat@...l-hjelmeland.no> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>, Maxim Uvarov <muvarov@...il.com>, Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel@...oirfairelinux.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>, Woojung Huh <Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com>, Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>, Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>, Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/10] net: dsa: add debugfs interface On 15. sep. 2017 07:51, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:01:32PM CEST, andrew@...n.ch wrote: >>> Can you clarify what type of registers it is you are wanting to read? >>> We already have ethtool which is meant to allow reading the device >>> registers for a given netdev. As long as the port has a netdev >>> associated it then there is no need to be getting into debugfs since >>> we should probably just be using ethtool. >> >> Not all ports of a DSA switch have a netdev. This is by design. The >> presentation we gave to Netdev 2.1 gives some of the background. >> >> Plus a switch has a lot of registers not associated to port. Often a >> switch has more global registers than port registers. >> >>> Also as Jiri pointed out there is already devlink which would probably >>> be a better way to get the associated information for those pieces >>> that don't have a netdev associated with them. >> >> We have looked at the devlink a few times. The current dpipe code is >> not generic enough. It makes assumptions about the architecture of the >> switch, that it is all match/action based. The niche of top of rack >> switches might be like that, but average switches are not. >> >> If dpipe was to support simple generic two dimensional tables, we >> probably would use it. >> >> David suggested making a class device for DSA. It is not ideal, but we >> are probably going to go that way. > > I believe that is also big mistake. > > Could you put together your requirements so we can work it out to extend > devlink to support them? > > Thanks. > $ ack -i devlink Documentation/ $ ack -i dpipe Documentation/ $ How you expect new mechanisms to be taken into use with zero documentation? To all: Why does reviewers nitpick about undocumented formatting rules, but not ask about documentation? Egil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists