netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC 00/12] devlink: introduce port flavours and common phys_port

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: <20180324074551.GD1891@nanopsycho>
Date:   Sat, 24 Mar 2018 08:45:51 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, idosch@...lanox.com,
        jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
        vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        michael.chan@...adcom.com, ganeshgr@...lsio.com,
        saeedm@...lanox.com, simon.horman@...ronome.com,
        pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com, john.hurley@...ronome.com,
        dirk.vandermerwe@...ronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
        ogerlitz@...lanox.com, dsahern@...il.com, vijaya.guvva@...ium.com,
        satananda.burla@...ium.com, raghu.vatsavayi@...ium.com,
        felix.manlunas@...ium.com, gospo@...adcom.com,
        sathya.perla@...adcom.com, vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com,
        tariqt@...lanox.com, eranbe@...lanox.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 00/12] devlink: introduce port flavours and
 common phys_port_name generation

Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 04:24:12PM CET, andrew@...n.ch wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 03:59:35PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 02:43:57PM CET, andrew@...n.ch wrote:
>> >> I tested this for mlxsw and nfp. I have no way to test this on DSA hw,
>> >> I would really appretiate DSA guys to test this.
>> >
>> >Hi Jiri
>> >
>> >With the missing break added, i get:
>> >
>> >root@...-devel-b:~# ./iproute2/devlink/devlink port 
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/0: type eth netdev lan0 flavour physical number 0
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/1: type eth netdev lan1 flavour physical number 1
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/2: type eth netdev lan2 flavour physical number 2
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/3: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/4: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/5: type notset flavour dsa number 5
>> >mdio_bus/0.1:00/6: type notset flavour cpu number 6
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/0: type eth netdev lan3 flavour physical number 0
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/1: type eth netdev lan4 flavour physical number 1
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/2: type eth netdev lan5 flavour physical number 2
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/3: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/4: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/5: type notset flavour dsa number 5
>> >mdio_bus/0.2:00/6: type notset flavour dsa number 6
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/0: type eth netdev lan6 flavour physical number 0
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/1: type eth netdev lan7 flavour physical number 1
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/2: type eth netdev lan8 flavour physical number 2
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/3: type eth netdev optical3 flavour physical number 3
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/4: type eth netdev optical4 flavour physical number 4
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/5: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/6: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/7: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/8: type notset
>> >mdio_bus/0.4:00/9: type notset flavour dsa number 9
>
>> That is basically front panel number for physical ports.
>
>You cannot make that assumption. As you can see here, we have 3 ports
>with the number 0.
>
>Look at clearfog, armada-388-clearfog.dts. port 0=lan5, port 1=lan4
>port 2=lan3, port 3=lan2, port 4=lan1, port 5=cpu, port 6=lan6.
>
>The hardware and mechanical engineer is free to wire switch ports to
>the front panel however they want. That is why we put the netdev name
>in device tree.

Got it. Hmm, so I think that the port number can be made optional and
when it is present, it would be used to generate phys_port_name. If
not, perhaps devlink port index could be used instead.

So iiuc, you don't really need phys_port_name in dsa, as it provides
misleading names, right? Why is it implemented then?

>
>    Andrew