netdev - Re: PHC device sharing between PCI functions

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: <20130704053605.GC4457@netboy>
Date:	Thu, 4 Jul 2013 07:36:05 +0200
From:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc:	linux-net-drivers <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Laurence Evans <levans@...arflare.com>
Subject: Re: PHC device sharing between PCI functions

On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 08:52:33PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 
> So you think each function should have its own clock device, but it's
> only writable on one?  I think that would work, but I thought it would
> be undesirable to have multiple aliases for the same physical clock.

The aliases would not bother me, as long as the ethtool interface-to-phc
association works properly. Of course, if there is a way to suppress
the aliases in the non-VM case, that would be ideal.

Thanks,
Richard
--
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