netdev - Re: [RFC 02/10] IB/hfi-vnic: Virtual Network Interface Controller (VNIC) Bus driver

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: <20161129161950.GB742@obsidianresearch.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Nov 2016 09:19:50 -0700
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To:     "Vishwanathapura, Niranjana" <niranjana.vishwanathapura@...el.com>
Cc:     "ira.weiny" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 02/10] IB/hfi-vnic: Virtual Network Interface Controller
 (VNIC) Bus driver

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:31:06PM -0800, Vishwanathapura, Niranjana wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:05:09PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:13:50PM -0800, Vishwanathapura, Niranjana wrote:
> >
> >>In order to be truely device independent the hfi_vnic ULP should not depend
> >>on a device exported symbol. Instead device should register its functions
> >>with the ULP. Hence the approaches a) and b).
> >
> >It is not device independent, it is hard linked to hfi1, just like our
> >other multi-component drivers.. So don't worry about that.
> >
> 
> We would like to keep the design clean and avoid any tight coupling here
> (our original design in this series tackled these).
> Any strong reason not to go with a) or b) ?

You are not making a subsystem. Don't overcomplicate things. A
multi-part device device can just directly link.

Jason