netdev - Re: [net-next v2 1/1] virtual-bus: Implementation of Virtual Bus

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:   Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:17:26 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "nhorman@...hat.com" <nhorman@...hat.com>,
        "sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>,
        Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@...el.com>,
        Tiwei Bie <tiwei.bie@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next v2 1/1] virtual-bus: Implementation of Virtual Bus


On 2019/11/21 上午6:39, Parav Pandit wrote:
>> From: Alex Williamson<alex.williamson@...hat.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 4:08 PM
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:11:08 -0400
>> Jason Gunthorpe<jgg@...pe.ca>  wrote:
>>
>>> I feel like mdev is suffering from mission creep. I see people
>>> proposing to use mdev for many wild things, the Mellanox SF stuff in
>>> the other thread and this 'virtio subsystem' being the two that have
>>> come up publicly this month.
>> Tell me about it...;)
>>
> Initial Mellanox sub function proposal was done using dedicated non-mdev subdev bus in [1] because mdev looked very vfio-ish.
>
> Along the way mdev proposal was suggested at [2] by mdev maintainers to use.
> The bus existed that detached two drivers (mdev and vfio_mdev), there was some motivation to attach other drivers.
>
> After that we continued discussion and mdev extension using alias to have persistent naming in [3].
>
> So far so good, but when we want to have actual use of mdev driver, it doesn't look right.:-)
>

Want to implement devlink for mdev then? I think it may help in the case.

Thanks