netdev - Re: [RFC iproute2-next] devlink: add info subcommand

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: <20190115095815.128eeb84@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jan 2019 09:58:15 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [RFC iproute2-next] devlink: add info subcommand

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:00:46 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> I could have a line card implementing a port which has version
> information, as well as version information for the backplane which
> would be under dev.

I'd argue a line card is not a port, so adding port info for line cards
is, again, taking a step backward towards unclear semantics.  Line cards
are a very well understood concept, and they deserve their own
handling.  And ports may _belong_ to line cards.