netdev - Re: [patch net-next v5 0/4] export device physical port id to userspace

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: <20130729101719.GA1703@minipsycho.brq.redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:17:19 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, stephen@...workplumber.org,
	Narendra_K@...l.com, bhutchings@...arflare.com,
	john.r.fastabend@...el.com, or.gerlitz@...il.com,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	bruce.w.allan@...el.com, carolyn.wyborny@...el.com,
	donald.c.skidmore@...el.com, gregory.v.rose@...el.com,
	peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
	john.ronciak@...el.com, tushar.n.dave@...el.com,
	matthew.vick@...el.com, mitch.a.williams@...el.com,
	vyasevic@...hat.com, amwang@...hat.com, johannes@...solutions.net
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v5 0/4] export device physical port id to
 userspace

Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 10:15:31PM CEST, davem@...emloft.net wrote:
>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:09:52 +0200
>
>> This patchset is based on patch by Narendra_K@...l.com
>> Once device which can change phys port id during its lifetime adopts this,
>> NETDEV_CHANGEPHYSPORTID event will be added and driver will call
>> call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_NETDEV_CHANGEPHYSPORTID, dev) to propagate
>> the change to userspace.
>
>I'm generally fine with these patches, but some things still need to be
>done.
>
>First of all, I want a real comprehensive description of this patch
>series in the "0/4" posting.
>
>It should answer, in detail, the following questions:
>
>1) Why do we need this, and why do existing facilities fail to provide
>   a way to accomplish this?
>
>2) Why is the physical port ID defined as a 32 byte opaque cookie?
>   What formats and layouts need to be accomodated, and which
>   influenced the design of the ID?
>
>3) Are IDs globally unique?  Why or why not?  If IDs should be
>   globally unique, but only in certain cases, what exactly are those
>   cases.
>
>And please address Ben's concerns about global uniqueness in the
>igb/igbvf changes, and whether a 32-bit value is sufficient.

Will do. Thanks Dave

>
>Thanks.
--
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