netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 12/19] devlink: Introduce mdev port flavour

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: <AM0PR05MB4866D31D34141C85E72D4180D17B0@AM0PR05MB4866.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Nov 2019 15:41:57 +0000
From:   Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
CC:     "alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        "kwankhede@...dia.com" <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
        "leon@...nel.org" <leon@...nel.org>,
        "cohuck@...hat.com" <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 12/19] devlink: Introduce mdev port flavour



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 3:30 AM
> To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
> Cc: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>; alex.williamson@...hat.com;
> davem@...emloft.net; kvm@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>; kwankhede@...dia.com;
> leon@...nel.org; cohuck@...hat.com; Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>; linux-
> rdma@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 12/19] devlink: Introduce mdev port flavour
> 
> Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 03:20:24AM CET, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com wrote:
> >On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:44:53 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> > > > > @@ -6649,6 +6678,9 @@ static int
> >> > > > __devlink_port_phys_port_name_get(struct devlink_port
> >> > > > *devlink_port,
> >> > > > >  		n = snprintf(name, len, "pf%uvf%u",
> >> > > > >  			     attrs->pci_vf.pf, attrs->pci_vf.vf);
> >> > > > >  		break;
> >> > > > > +	case DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_MDEV:
> >> > > > > +		n = snprintf(name, len, "p%s", attrs-
> >mdev.mdev_alias);
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Didn't you say m$alias in the cover letter? Not p$alias?
> >> > > >
> >> > > In cover letter I described the naming scheme for the netdevice
> >> > > of the mdev device (not the representor). Representor follows
> >> > > current unique phys_port_name method.
> >> >
> >> > So we're reusing the letter that normal ports use?
> >> >
> >> I initially had 'm' as prefix to make it easy to recognize as mdev's port,
> instead of 'p', but during internal review Jiri's input was to just use 'p'.
> >
> >Let's way for Jiri to weigh in then.
> 
> Hmm, it's been so far I can't really recall. But looking at what we have
> now:
> DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL "p%u"/"p%us%u"
> DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PCI_PF   "pf%u"
> DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PCI_VF   "pf%uvf%u"
> For mdev, the ideal format would be:
> "pf%um%s" or "pf%uvf%um%s", but that would be too long.
> I guess that "m%s" is fine.
> "p" is probably not a good idea as phys ports already have that.
> 
> [...]
Ok. I will revise to use "m%s".
Thanks.