netdev - Re: [EXT] Re: [net-next PATCH 0/2] Introduce mbox tracepoints for Octeontx2

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 7 Sep 2020 16:29:45 +0530
From:   sundeep subbaraya <sundeep.lkml@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta <sbhatta@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [net-next PATCH 0/2] Introduce mbox tracepoints for Octeontx2

Hi Jakub,

On Sat, Sep 5, 2020 at 2:07 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 12:29:04 +0000 Sunil Kovvuri Goutham wrote:
> > > >No, there are 3 drivers registering to 3 PCI device IDs and there can
> > > >be many instances of the same devices. So there can be 10's of instances of
> > > AF, PF and VFs.
> > >
> > > So you can still have per-pci device devlink instance and use the tracepoint
> > > Jakub suggested.
> > >
> >
> > Two things
> > - As I mentioned above, there is a Crypto driver which uses the same mbox APIs
> >   which is in the process of upstreaming. There also we would need trace points.
> >   Not sure registering to devlink just for the sake of tracepoint is proper.
> >
> > - The devlink trace message is like this
> >
> >    TRACE_EVENT(devlink_hwmsg,
> >      . . .
> >         TP_printk("bus_name=%s dev_name=%s driver_name=%s incoming=%d type=%lu buf=0x[%*phD] len=%zu",
> >                   __get_str(bus_name), __get_str(dev_name),
> >                   __get_str(driver_name), __entry->incoming, __entry->type,
> >                   (int) __entry->len, __get_dynamic_array(buf), __entry->len)
> >    );
> >
> >    Whatever debug message we want as output doesn't fit into this.
>
> Make use of the standard devlink tracepoint wherever applicable, and you
> can keep your extra ones if you want (as long as Jiri don't object).

Sure and noted. I have tried to use devlink tracepoints and since it
could not fit our purpose I used these.

Thanks,
Sundeep