netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V1 0/3] net/mlx4_core: Allow setting init-time device specific parameters

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:	Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:05:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hadarh@....mellanox.co.il
Cc:	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, amirv@...lanox.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, hadarh@...lanox.com, yevgenyp@...lanox.com,
	ogerlitz@...lanox.com, talal@...lanox.com,
	shannon.nelson@...el.com, dledford@...hat.com,
	greearb@...delatech.com, gregory.v.rose@...el.com,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	john.ronciak@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V1 0/3] net/mlx4_core: Allow setting init-time
 device specific parameters

From: Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@....mellanox.co.il>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:07:35 +0200

> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:14 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>
>> From: Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>
>> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 11:08:50 +0200
>>
>> > Also, customers are paying for a very sophisticated piece of
>> > hardware, and we would like to enable power user to tweak it in some
>> > situtations. Of course the default mode should be used in 99% of the
>> > use cases.
>>
>> How much money someone pays for your hardware has nothing to do with
>> the standards by which we design userspace interfaces to configure
>> these devices.
>>
>> These textual interfaces are arbitrary, and you are choosing it only
>> because you cannot come up with a more reasonable scheme,
>>
>> I'm not applying these changes.
>> --
> 
> In previous conversations Greg suggested us to use configfs.
> 
> Is this case a misuse of configfs?  maybe configfs should be deprecated... Greg?
> 
> Is a scheme based on netlink will be acceptable by you?

A portable, well typed, interface that other vendors could use if their
hardware had similar features would be acceptable.
--
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