linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx ops support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <F32413B2F4429255+20250815072220.GD1148411@nic-Precision-5820-Tower>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 15:22:20 +0800
From: Yibo Dong <dong100@...se.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
	corbet@....net, gur.stavi@...wei.com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
	mpe@...erman.id.au, danishanwar@...com, lee@...ger.us,
	gongfan1@...wei.com, lorenzo@...nel.org, geert+renesas@...der.be,
	Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com, lukas.bulwahn@...hat.com,
	alexanderduyck@...com, richardcochran@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx ops support

On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 05:59:10AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 10:43:02AM +0800, Yibo Dong wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 04:13:52AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > > +const struct mucse_mbx_operations mucse_mbx_ops_generic = {
> > > > +	.init_params = mucse_init_mbx_params_pf,
> > > > +	.read = mucse_read_mbx_pf,
> > > > +	.write = mucse_write_mbx_pf,
> > > > +	.read_posted = mucse_read_posted_mbx,
> > > > +	.write_posted = mucse_write_posted_mbx,
> > > > +	.check_for_msg = mucse_check_for_msg_pf,
> > > > +	.check_for_ack = mucse_check_for_ack_pf,
> > > > +	.configure = mucse_mbx_configure_pf,
> > > > +};
> > > 
> > > As far as i can see, this is the only instance of
> > > mucse_mbx_operations. Will there be other instances of this structure?
> > > 
> > > 	Andrew
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, It is the only instance. Not other instances at all.
> > Is there any improvement?
> 
> So throw away the abstraction and call the functions directly. Only
> add abstractions if you have some differences to abstract over. Only
> make the driver more complex and harder to understand, if you need to
> make the driver more complex and harder to understand.... KISS.
> 
> 	Andrew
> 

Ok, I will try to call the functions directly.


Thanks for your feedback.