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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 11:04:50 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v3 01/14] devlink: Add reload action option to devlink reload command Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 09:47:19PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote: >On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 07:57:29 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 05:30:25PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote: >> >On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 11:46:27 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >> >? Do we need such change there too or keep it as is, each action by itself >> >> >and return what was performed ? >> >> >> >> Well, I don't know. User asks for X, X should be performed, not Y or Z. >> >> So perhaps the return value is not needed. >> >> Just driver advertizes it supports X, Y, Z and the users says: >> >> 1) do X, driver does X >> >> 2) do Y, driver does Y >> >> 3) do Z, driver does Z >> >> [ >> >> I think this kindof circles back to the original proposal... >> > >> >Why? User does not care if you activate new devlink params when >> >activating new firmware. Trust me. So why make the user figure out >> >which of all possible reset option they should select? If there is >> >a legitimate use case to limit what is reset - it should be handled >> >by a separate negative attribute, like --live which says don't reset >> >anything. >> >> I see. Okay. Could you please sum-up the interface as you propose it? > >What I proposed on v1, pass requested actions as a bitfield, driver may >perform more actions, we can return performed actions in the response. Okay. So for example for mlxsw, user might say: 1) I want driver reinit kernel reports: fw reset and driver reinit was done 2) I want fw reset kernel reports: fw reset and driver reinit was done 3) I want fw reset and driver reinit kernel reports: fw reset and driver reinit was done > >Then separate attribute to carry constraints for the request, like >--live. Hmm, this is a bit unclear how it is supposed to work. The constraints apply for all? I mean, the actions are requested by a bitfield. So the user can say: I want fw reset and driver reinit --live. "--live" applies to both fw reset and driver reinit? That is odd. > >I'd think the supported actions in devlink_ops would be fine as a >bitfield, too. Combinations are often hard to capture in static data.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists