netdev - Re: [RFC] Add clause 45 ioctl

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:	Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:05:59 +0300
From:	"Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
To:	"Ben Hutchings" <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
cc:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Yaniv Rosner" <yaniv.rosner@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Add clause 45 ioctl

On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 06:22 -0700, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > I'm sending this as RFC - if anyone has alternative suggestions on how
> > user space application can access the PHY, I would appreciate it.
> [...]
> 
> I was working on an alternate interface that would use the existing
> structure and ioctls.  There are at least two drivers (cxgb3 and sfc)
> that already do this, though they currently pack PRTAD and DEVAD
> differently in the phy_id field.

I can use the same approach and overload the CL22 definitions, but don't
you think it is cleaner to add the CL45 definition? I think that the
fact that two drivers are already overloading the CL22 for CL45 usage is
showing that CL45 is needed, and the fact that they are doing that
differently shows that there is a need for a clean definition. I'm just
thinking about someone trying to write an application for all CL45
supporting drivers - it is easier if there is a clean interface.

What do you say?

Thanks,
Eilon

--
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