netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next v3 2/7] ethtool: Get link mode in use instead of speed and duplex parameters

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: <DM6PR12MB4516DD64A5C46B80848D3645D8BC9@DM6PR12MB4516.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:06:36 +0000
From:   Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>
To:     Edwin Peer <edwin.peer@...adcom.com>
CC:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "Michal Kubecek" <mkubecek@...e.cz>, mlxsw <mlxsw@...dia.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v3 2/7] ethtool: Get link mode in use instead of
 speed and duplex parameters



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edwin Peer <edwin.peer@...adcom.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 8:04 PM
> To: Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>
> Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>; David S . Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>; Jiri Pirko
> <jiri@...dia.com>; Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>; f.fainelli@...il.com; Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>; mlxsw
> <mlxsw@...dia.com>; Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/7] ethtool: Get link mode in use instead of speed and duplex parameters
> 
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 12:36 AM Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Why isn't this also handled using a capability bit as is done for
> > > lanes? Is link_mode read-only? Should it / will it always be? If not,
> > > can drivers also derive the other fields if asked to set link_mode?
> >
> > The link_mode param is only for deriving all the speed, lanes and duplex params in ethtool instead of deriving in driver and then >
> passing each individual, as Michal asked.
> 
> I understand the benefit of deriving the dependent fields in core code
> rather than in each driver, I just don't think this is necessarily
> mutually exclusive with being able to force a particular link mode at
> the driver API, making link_mode R/W (and even extend this interface
> to user space). For a driver that works internally in terms of the
> link_mode it's returning, this would be more natural.

I am not sure I fully understood you, but it seems like some expansion that can be done in the future if needed, and doesn't need to hold that patchset back. 

Thanks,
Danielle

> 
> > > That would be easy enough. Why don't we simply allow user space to set
> > > link mode directly too (in addition to being able to constrain lanes
> > > for autoneg or forced speeds)?
> >
> > It is already possible to do using 'advertise' parameter.
> 
> That's not the same thing. If it were, you wouldn't need the lanes
> parameter in the first place.
> 
> Regards,
> Edwin Peer