linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 01/20] dlb: add skeleton for DLB driver

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]

Date:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 08:29:41 -0800
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Mike Ximing Chen <mike.ximing.chen@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Gage Eads <gage.eads@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 01/20] dlb: add skeleton for DLB driver

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:36 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 04:56:22PM -0600, Mike Ximing Chen wrote:
> > Add basic driver functionality (load, unload, probe, and remove callbacks)
> > for the DLB driver.
> >
> > Add documentation which describes in detail the hardware, the user
> > interface, device interrupts, and the driver's power-management strategy.
> > For more details about the driver see the documentation in the patch.
> >
> > Add a DLB entry to the MAINTAINERS file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Ximing Chen <mike.ximing.chen@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/misc-devices/dlb.rst   | 259 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  Documentation/misc-devices/index.rst |   1 +
> >  MAINTAINERS                          |   8 +
> >  drivers/misc/Kconfig                 |   1 +
> >  drivers/misc/Makefile                |   1 +
> >  drivers/misc/dlb/Kconfig             |  18 ++
> >  drivers/misc/dlb/Makefile            |   9 +
> >  drivers/misc/dlb/dlb_hw_types.h      |  32 ++++
> >  drivers/misc/dlb/dlb_main.c          | 156 ++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/misc/dlb/dlb_main.h          |  37 ++++
> >  10 files changed, 522 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/misc-devices/dlb.rst
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/misc/dlb/Kconfig
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/misc/dlb/Makefile
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/misc/dlb/dlb_hw_types.h
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/misc/dlb/dlb_main.c
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/misc/dlb/dlb_main.h
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/misc-devices/dlb.rst b/Documentation/misc-devices/dlb.rst
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..aa79be07ee49
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/misc-devices/dlb.rst
> > @@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
> > +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +
> > +===========================================
> > +Intel(R) Dynamic Load Balancer Overview
> > +===========================================
> > +
> > +:Authors: Gage Eads and Mike Ximing Chen
> > +
> > +Contents
> > +========
> > +
> > +- Introduction
> > +- Scheduling
> > +- Queue Entry
> > +- Port
> > +- Queue
> > +- Credits
> > +- Scheduling Domain
> > +- Interrupts
> > +- Power Management
> > +- User Interface
> > +- Reset
> > +
> > +Introduction
> > +============
> > +
> > +The Intel(r) Dynamic Load Balancer (Intel(r) DLB) is a PCIe device that
> > +provides load-balanced, prioritized scheduling of core-to-core communication.
> > +
> > +Intel DLB is an accelerator for the event-driven programming model of
> > +DPDK's Event Device Library[2]. The library is used in packet processing
> > +pipelines that arrange for multi-core scalability, dynamic load-balancing, and
> > +variety of packet distribution and synchronization schemes.
>
> As this is a networking related thing, I would like you to get the
> proper reviews/acks from the networking maintainers before I can take
> this.
>
> Or, if they think it has nothing to do with networking, that's fine too,
> but please do not try to route around them.

To be clear, I did not sense any attempt to route around networking
review as it appeared generically centered around hardware accelerated
IPC. At the same time I don't know what I don't know about how this
might interact with networking initiatives so the review trip seems
reasonable to me.