netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/7] net: devlink: Add unused 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20200929130758.GF8264@nanopsycho>
Date:   Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:07:58 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/7] net: devlink: Add unused port flavour

Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 01:03:56PM CEST, vladimir.oltean@....com wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 06:46:14PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> That makes sense to me as it would be confusing to suddenly show unused port
>> flavors after this patch series land. Andrew, Vladimir, does that work for
>> you as well?
>
>I have nothing to object against somebody adding a '--all' argument to
>devlink port commands.

How "unused" is a "flavour"? It seems to me more like a separate
attribute as port of any "flavour" may be potentially "unused". I don't
think we should mix these 2.