netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] Add support for DSFP transceiver type

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]

Message-ID: <98319caa-de5f-6f5e-9c9e-ee680e5abdc0@nvidia.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:40:22 +0200
From:   Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Adrian Pop <pop.adrian61@...il.com>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] Add support for DSFP transceiver type


On 11/24/2020 11:16 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 02:14:59 +0100 Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:19:56AM +0200, Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>>> Add support for new cable module type DSFP (Dual Small Form-Factor Pluggable
>>> transceiver). DSFP EEPROM memory layout is compatible with CMIS 4.0 spec. Add
>>> CMIS 4.0 module type to UAPI and implement DSFP EEPROM dump in mlx5.
>> So the patches themselves look O.K.
>>
>> But we are yet again kicking the can down the road and not fixing the
>> underlying inflexibility of the API.
>>
>> Do we want to keep kicking the can, or is now the time to do the work
>> on this API?
> This is hardly rocket science. Let's do it right.

OK, we will add API options to select bank and page to read any specific 
page the user selects. So advanced user will use it get the optional 
pages he needs, but what about non advanced user who wants to use the 
current API with a current script for DSFP EEPROM. Isn't it better that 
he will get the 5 mandatory pages then keep it not supported ?