netdev - Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 08/13] QLogic VNIC: sysfs interface implementation for the 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]

Message-ID: <4848234B.1080200@trash.net>
Date:	Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:32:59 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
CC:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>, Dave Dillow <dillowda@...l.gov>,
	Amar Mudrankit <amar.mudrankit@...gic.com>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	general@...ts.openfabrics.org, poornima.kamath@...gic.com
Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 08/13] QLogic VNIC: sysfs interface
 implementation for the driver

Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:38:36 -0700
> Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com> wrote:
> 
>>  > That said, given that SRP's been using sysfs since it went in, is there
>>  > a reason to move to configfs other than it's the new preferred way to do
>>  > it? Given the desire to not break ABI's -- and IIRC sysfs was declared to
>>  > be under that unbrella -- wouldn't we have to at least carry both
>>  > interfaces for a while, assuming we can even get rid of the sysfs one?
>>
>> Yes, we'd definitely be carrying both interfaces for at least a year.
>>
>> Looking further into this, I'm not sure it makes much sense either.
>> Another problem with configfs is that the lifetime of the object is
>> controlled by userspace.  So if we lose a connection to a target,
>> the object will persist in configfs until userspace notices.
>>
>>  - R.
> 
> There is nothing stopping adding a well designed alternate interface.
> Either netlink or ioctl's are okay. As long as it is 32/64 bit clean.


 From a quick look it seems it should use rtnl_link instead
of adding yet another private sysfs interface.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html