netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 25/26] switchdev: convert swdev_fib_ipv4_add/del over to swdev_port_obj

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <551ED558.3020303@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 03 Apr 2015 11:00:56 -0700
From:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
CC:	sfeldma@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux@...ck-us.net,
	sridhar.samudrala@...el.com, ronen.arad@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 25/26] switchdev: convert swdev_fib_ipv4_add/del
 over to swdev_port_obj_add/del

On 01/04/15 09:05, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> This looks nice. However, my only concern is we have now ended up adding a
>> whole layer of abstraction to all objects. The api abstraction seemed fine.
>> But, carrying it to objects and duplicating every object in the swdev layer
>> seems too much duplication. Maybe its just me.
>> we will end up adding this for bond attributes...vxlan...fdb and nftables
> 
> +1

+1.

> 
>> etc.
>>
>> The advantage of switchdev in the kernel was to have access the existing
>> kernel api and objects directly from switchdev layer.
>> In which case, to me, it would be better to skip this extra layer of objects.
>> And keep the way you had it originally.

Same here, I am not exactly sure how much good the abstract object is
giving us here since we are already in the kernel, and we cannot/do not
necessarily want to eliminate a large number of swdev_ops, as these are
precisely the API we want to define.

NB: if we were to do that for swdev_ops, the next step would be doing
the same thing for netdev_ops to reduce their number, would not we?

Maybe for now solving the stacked device problem and
prepare/commit/rollback is good enough to keep you busy that adding the
object layer is a completely secondary problem to solve ;)?
-- 
Florian
--
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