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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DM6PR11MB381958D370FD3BF0173BBD5685780@DM6PR11MB3819.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jul 2020 11:41:27 +0000
From:   "Wu, Hao" <hao.wu@...el.com>
To:     "Xu, Yilun" <yilun.xu@...el.com>
CC:     "mdf@...nel.org" <mdf@...nel.org>,
        "linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "trix@...hat.com" <trix@...hat.com>,
        "lgoncalv@...hat.com" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Gerlach <matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Weight, Russell H" <russell.h.weight@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] fpga: dfl: create a dfl bus type to support DFL
  devices

> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +dfl_dev->type = feature_dev_id_type(pdev);
> > > +dfl_dev->feature_id = (unsigned long long)feature->id;
> > > +
> > > +dfl_dev->dev.parent  = &pdev->dev;
> > > +dfl_dev->dev.bus     = &dfl_bus_type;
> > > +dfl_dev->dev.release = release_dfl_dev;
> > > +dev_set_name(&dfl_dev->dev, "%s.%d", dev_name(&pdev->dev),
> > > +     feature->index);
> >
> > Or it's better to have a generic name for the device on the bus.
> 
> mm.. It is good suggestion, we should have a unified name for dfl
> devices.
> 
> How about ("dfl.%d.%d", pdev->id, feature->index)

It's quite difficult for people to use related information from these magic 
numbers. They are not ids defined in the spec, so just dfl_dev.x with one
unique id seems to be better. If you really need to expose some id
information, maybe you can consider adding some standard sysfs entry
to all dfl_dev, I think that will be easier for users. How do you think?

Thanks
Hao

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ