netdev - Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal

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:   Tue, 14 Jul 2020 14:04:40 -0400
From:   Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 6:00 PM Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 02:51:39PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > To start out with, I'd like to attempt to eliminate as much of the use
> > of master and slave in the bonding driver as possible. For the most
> > part, I think this can be done without breaking UAPI, but may require
> > changes to anything accessing bond info via proc or sysfs.
>
> Could we, please, avoid breaking existing userspace tools and scripts?
> Massive code churn is one thing and we could certainly bite the bullet
> and live with it (even if I'm still not convinced it would be as great
> idea as some present it) but trading theoretical offense for real and
> palpable harm to existing users is something completely different.
>
> Or is "don't break userspace" no longer the "first commandment" of linux
> kernel development?

Definitely looking to minimize breakage here, and it sounds like it'll
be to the point of "none", or this won't fly. I think this may require
having "legacy" aliases for certain interfaces and the like, to both
provide a less problematic interface name as the new default, but
prevent breaking any existing setups.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@...hat.com