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: <20180928164553.GB22858@lunn.ch>
Date:   Fri, 28 Sep 2018 18:45:53 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc:     Ariel Almog <arielalmogworkemails@...il.com>,
        linville@...driver.com, Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        ganeshgr@...lsio.com, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com,
        dustin@...ulusnetworks.com, dirk.vandermerwe@...ronome.com,
        shayag@...lanox.com, ariela@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool] ethtool: support combinations of FEC modes

> I see where you're coming from, but if people start needing to manually
>  configure FEC on their consumer devices, possibly we have bigger
>  problems.

Yes, i agree with that. For the consumer market, SFPs needs to grow up
and start doing full and reliable auto-neg, just like copper Ethernet.

However, there is often an intermediate step after the really niche
market like TOR routers. Industrial applications start using this
stuff. There are a lot of planes flying today using SFPs for the
inflight entertainment systems. Fibre weights less than copper. It is
a somewhat specialist market, so you probably can still force them to
read the hardware manual, but i think they would prefer not to. And
i'm sure they are not the only industrial users. There are likely to
be more industrial users than TOR users.

In general, it is hard to know which APIs are going to remain Unix
Wizard level, and which are going to be used by mere mortals. So
ideally, we want consistency everywhere.

> I think the alternative, of finding a set of semantics that fits
>  everyone's hardware and covers everyone's requirements, is likely to
>  be difficult (and probably require changing the ethtool API).

Now is a good time to change the API, since we are moving to a netlink
socket. Which is why these questions were asked in the first place...

	Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ