netdev - Re: Fwd: [ofa-general] FW: QLogic vNIC Kernel Submission

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]

Date:	Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:19:22 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC:	Amar Mudrankit <amar.mudrankit@...gic.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	rdreier@...co.com,
	Ramachandra K <ramachandra.kuchimanchi@...gic.com>,
	poornima.kamath@...gic.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: [ofa-general] FW: QLogic vNIC Kernel Submission

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Amar Mudrankit wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: John Russo <john.russo@...gic.com>
>> Date: Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 6:36 PM
>> Subject: [ofa-general] FW: QLogic vNIC Kernel Submission
>> To: general@...ts.openfabrics.org
>>
>>
>> It looks as if my original email was "scrubbed" before it made the
>> mailing list so I am resending it...
>>
>> QLogic has been attempting to submit our virtual NIC (vNIC) driver to
>> the Linux kernel for several months.  We have made changes to the code
>> based on the feedback we have received over four rounds of
>> submissions. Among the feedback we received during this process was a
>> request to alter our code to use a single value per file for
>> configuration of our driver through sysfs interface.  After spending
>> much time and effort to complete this change to our design we
>> re-submitted the driver only to receive a response suggesting that we
>> change once again from this interface to a different API interface
>> called rtnl_link.  Needless to say I am very frustrated with this
>> process. This new API interface would require substantial changes to
>> our code.
>>
>> QLogic has met the initial request to move to a single valued sysfs
>> interface and I would hope that this new request will be waived and
>> will not be a roadblock to inclusion of our driver to the kernel.
> 
> One option is to get the base driver into the tree, sans sysfs 
> interface, and wait for the netlink interface.
> 
> As Patrick noted, it is very important to -not- just throw new user 
> interfaces into the tree, because that essentially sets them in stone at 
> that point, needing to be supported as an Application Binary Interface 
> (ABI).
> 
> The other stuff, like duplication of existing interfaces and strange 
> FSM-based netdev registration, are problems that could be worked out 
> in-tree, I suppose.

That sounds fine to me. The duplication is even going away
automatically with removal of the 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