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: <20170915055107.GA1927@nanopsycho.orion> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 07:51:07 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: 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>, Egil Hjelmeland <privat@...l-hjelmeland.no>, 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 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.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists