netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI ports

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]

Date:   Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:16:42 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
        "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "oss-drivers@...ronome.com" <oss-drivers@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI
 ports

On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:11:54 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> >2. flavour should not be vf/pf, flavour should be hostport, switchport.
> >> >Because switch is flat and agnostic of pf/vf/mdev.    
> >> 
> >> Not sure. It's good to have this kind of visibility.  
> >
> >Yes, this subthread honestly makes me go from 60% sure to 95% sure we
> >shouldn't do the dual object thing :(  Seems like Parav is already
> >confused by it and suggests host port can exist without switch port :(  
> 
> Although I understand your hesitation, the host ports are also
> associated with the asic and should be under the devlink instance.
> It is just a matter of proper documentation and clear code to avoid
> confusions.

They are certainly a part and belong to the ASIC, the question in my
mind is more along the lines of do we want "one pipe/one port" or is
it okay to have multiple software objects of the same kind for those
objects.

To put it differently - do want a port object for each port of the ASIC
or do we want a port object for each netdev..