netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 3/4] ixgbe: Add support for ndo_ll

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:	Tue, 21 May 2013 11:42:23 +0300
From:	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	or.gerlitz@...il.com, eilong@...adcom.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, donald.c.skidmore@...el.com,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, willemb@...gle.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, hpa@...or.com, eliezer@...ir.org.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 3/4] ixgbe: Add support for ndo_ll_poll

On 21/05/2013 11:39, David Miller wrote:
> From: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:24:41 +0300
>
>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:14 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>> From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
>>> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:06:43 +0300
>>>
>>>> Hopefully this series will be accepted so we can send follow up support
>>>> for the bnx2x as well.
>>>
>>> I think in two or three more iterations it will be merged.
>>>
>>> There are no objections on the fundamentals, it's just implementation
>>> details and coding style at this point.
>>
>> Dave, sorry, I might be a bit behind the rest of the reviewers, but I
>> just fail to understand nor find any reference that explains the
>> module param of ixgbe nor it makes sense to me to merge that piece of
>> the code upstream (its not for staging, correct?), as I wrote here
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=136908123432072&w=2 basically, I
>> know you're not a great fun of module params (to say the least) and
>> surely not something named  "allow_unsafe_removal", thoughts?
>
> It's one of those "implementation details", I hate it too.

I'm open to suggestions.
--
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