netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC 03/12] net: introduce generic switch devices support

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: <20140821170301.GA10633@nanopsycho.lan>
Date:	Thu, 21 Aug 2014 19:03:01 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, nhorman@...driver.com,
	andy@...yhouse.net, tgraf@...g.ch, dborkman@...hat.com,
	ogerlitz@...lanox.com, jesse@...ira.com, pshelar@...ira.com,
	azhou@...ira.com, stephen@...workplumber.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, jhs@...atatu.com, sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com,
	f.fainelli@...il.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
	linville@...driver.com, dev@...nvswitch.org, jasowang@...hat.com,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com,
	ryazanov.s.a@...il.com, buytenh@...tstofly.org,
	aviadr@...lanox.com, nbd@...nwrt.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
	Neil.Jerram@...aswitch.com, ronye@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 03/12] net: introduce generic switch devices
 support

Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 06:41:23PM CEST, ben@...adent.org.uk wrote:
>On Thu, 2014-08-21 at 18:18 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> The goal of this is to provide a possibility to suport various switch
>> chips. Drivers should implement relevant ndos to do so. Now there is a
>> couple of ndos defines:
>> - for getting physical switch id is in place.
>> - for work with flows.
>> 
>> Note that user can use random port netdevice to access the switch.
>[...]
>
>Why isn't the switch treated as a real device (not necessarily a net
>device) that's included in the device model and that the port devices
>refer to?

That is certainly possible. But so far, there is no need for it. But I
guess that it's probably a good idea at least to put it into sysfs
structure.

Noted, thanks Ben.

>
>Ben.
>
>-- 
>Ben Hutchings
>If at first you don't succeed, you're doing about average.


--
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