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: <20190115180501.GG2290@nanopsycho>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jan 2019 19:05:01 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [RFC iproute2-next] devlink: add info subcommand

Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 06:53:52PM CET, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 09:20:11 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > static void help(void)
>> > {
>> > 	pr_err("Usage: devlink [ OPTIONS ] OBJECT { COMMAND | help }\n"
>> > 	       "       devlink [ -f[orce] ] -b[atch] filename\n"
>> >-	       "where  OBJECT := { dev | port | sb | monitor | dpipe | resource | region }\n"
>> >+	       "where  OBJECT := { dev | port | sb | monitor | dpipe | resource | region | info }\n"  
>> 
>> I think that "info" should be nested under "dev". It is related to dev.
>
>Ack.
>
>> Maybe it even does not have to be a separate command and can be a nested
>> attribute to existing DEVLINK_CMD_GET cmd.
>
>I thought about that, but I'd rather keep it as a separate command.  
>I think it'd be good to keep DEVLINK_CMD_GET nice and lean.  

Okay. Fair enough.


>
>For versions there may be FW communication required, and reading stuff
>out of flash.  I bit of overhead for users who just want the list of
>devlink instances.
>
>Having in under dev but as a separate command seems quite nice indeed.
>Especially given that there can only be a show subcommand..  So:
>
>For dump:
>$ devlink dev info
>
>But for get:
>$ devlink dev pci/0000:82:00.0 info
>
>or
>
>$ devlink dev info pci/0000:82:00.0

This is aligned with the rest.


>
>?