netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V3] net: ena: Add a driver for Amazon Elastic Network Adapters (ENA)

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: <20160715154748.GA10556@leon.nu>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jul 2016 18:47:48 +0300
From:	Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:	Benjamin Poirier <benjamin.poirier@...il.com>
Cc:	Netanel Belgazal <netanel@...apurnalabs.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zorik@...apurnalabs.com,
	saeed@...apurnalabs.com, alex@...apurnalabs.com, msw@...zon.com,
	aliguori@...zon.com, ben@...adent.org.uk, romieu@...zoreil.com,
	rami.rosen@...el.com, antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3] net: ena: Add a driver for Amazon Elastic
 Network Adapters (ENA)

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 08:17:59AM -0700, Benjamin Poirier wrote:
> On 2016/07/15 08:00, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 09:46:14AM +0300, Netanel Belgazal wrote:
> > > This is a driver for the ENA family of networking devices.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Netanel Belgazal <netanel@...apurnalabs.com>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Notes:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > >     - Increase driver version to 1.0.2
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > +static void ena_get_drvinfo(struct net_device *dev,
> > > +			    struct ethtool_drvinfo *info)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct ena_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > +
> > > +	strlcpy(info->driver, DRV_MODULE_NAME, sizeof(info->driver));
> > > +	strlcpy(info->version, DRV_MODULE_VERSION, sizeof(info->version));
> > 
> > Does module version give anything valuable in real life usage?
> > Do you plan to bump version after every patch?
> > 
> > Hint, NO.
> > 
> [...]
> > > +
> > > +#define DRV_MODULE_VER_MAJOR	1
> > > +#define DRV_MODULE_VER_MINOR	0
> > > +#define DRV_MODULE_VER_SUBMINOR 1
> > > +
> > > +#define DRV_MODULE_NAME		"ena"
> > > +#ifndef DRV_MODULE_VERSION
> > > +#define DRV_MODULE_VERSION \
> > > +	__stringify(DRV_MODULE_VER_MAJOR) "."	\
> > > +	__stringify(DRV_MODULE_VER_MINOR) "."	\
> > > +	__stringify(DRV_MODULE_VER_SUBMINOR)
> > > +#endif
> > > +#define DRV_MODULE_RELDATE      "22-JUNE-2016"
> > 
> > Please remove it, driver version is useless in real life kernel usage.
> > 
> 
> The release date might be a bit overkill but the driver version is
> useful in the context of distribution kernels where users sometimes mix
> and match newer drivers (ex: the intel sf.net drivers) with older
> kernels. When a bug is reported, a quick look at the module version can
> help indicate the provenance of the driver.

We already discussed it in a number of occasions, for example this is
response of Greg Kroah-Hartman to similar attempt to bump driver version
[1].

And as I said before, mostly this driver will change without any
reflection in driver version.

[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg29855.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)