netdev - Re: [net-next-2.6 V7 PATCH 1/2] Add netlink support for virtual port management (was iovnl)

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: <20100514173530.GI5798@x200.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:30 -0700
From:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...hat.com>
To:	Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>
Cc:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, chrisw@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 V7 PATCH 1/2] Add netlink support for virtual port
 management (was iovnl)

* Scott Feldman (scofeldm@...co.com) wrote:
> On 5/14/10 9:42 AM, "Patrick McHardy" <kaber@...sh.net> wrote:
> 
> > Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> Maybe a better structure would be to separate the two cases, also allowing
> >> a port profile to be associated with both the PF and with each of its VFs?
> >> 
> >> Something like this:
> >> 
> >> [IFLA_NUM_VF]
> >> [IFLA_VF_PORTS]
> >>   [IFLA_VF_PORT]
> >>     [IFLA_VF_PORT_*], ...
> >>   [IFLA_VF_PORT]
> >>     [IFLA_VF_PORT_*], ...
> >> [IFLA_PORT_SELF]
> >>   [IFLA_VF_PORT_*], ...
> > 
> > That would also be fine.
> 
> I want to make sure I've got this right before starting on ver8 of patch:
> 
>     - we'll use the layout listed above
> 
>     - RTM_SETLINK msg includes the full nested layout
> 
>         - contains IFLA_VF_PORTs for all VFs of a PF
>         - OR, contains IFLA_PORT_SELF if PF is it's own VF
> 
>         - it's up to the receiver to compare for changes for each VF
> 
>     - RTM_GETLINK msg includes the full nested layout
> 
>         - same rules as RTM_SETLINK above
> 
> I think we should redo the other IFLA_VF_xxx msgs in the same style.  I'm
> not going to tackle that for IFLA_VF_PORTS patch, but it would be a good
> followup patch.

Patrick layed out some nice details before.  Here's the link:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/151605/focus=151738

thanks,
-chris
--
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