netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] qed*: Add support for read/write of eeprom

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: <20160418.000712.473871996964045833.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 18 Apr 2016 00:07:12 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Sudarsana.Kalluru@...gic.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] qed*: Add support for read/write of eeprom

From: Yuval Mintz <Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 03:59:42 +0000

> The third option I see is to completely ditch this, stating that although
> We obviously CAN set the non-volatile memory we CAN'T do it with the
> regular API, and to move into doing this via some proprietary API such
> as debugfs.

Why go to debugfs rather than gracefully extending the ethtool stuff to
explicitly support what you need?

Anyone who says debugfs just isn't willing to design things correctly.

That's why I basically have started rejecting everything that tries
to use debugfs in the networking, it's the "I'm too damn lazy to
do this properly" option and I simply won't stand for crap like that
any more.