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]

Message-ID: <CAJL1qvHP0cLRVf53J9MuJrYCJLjE=mzEU70JofJ8zH_Yf-O16g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:07:35 +0200
From:	Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@....mellanox.co.il>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:	Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>, yevgenyp@...lanox.com,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Tal Alon <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

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?

Thanks,

Hadar and Amir
--
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