netdev - RE: [PATCH v4 01/23] iidc: Introduce iidc.h

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]

Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 01:38:37 +0000
From:   "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC:     "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
        "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 01/23] iidc: Introduce iidc.h

> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/23] iidc: Introduce iidc.h
> 
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 07:43:24PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 08:58:49PM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote:
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/23] iidc: Introduce iidc.h
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 04:01:03PM -0500, Shiraz Saleem wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +/* Following APIs are implemented by core PCI driver */ struct
> > > > > +iidc_core_ops {
> > > > > +	/* APIs to allocate resources such as VEB, VSI, Doorbell queues,
> > > > > +	 * completion queues, Tx/Rx queues, etc...
> > > > > +	 */
> > > > > +	int (*alloc_res)(struct iidc_core_dev_info *cdev_info,
> > > > > +			 struct iidc_res *res,
> > > > > +			 int partial_acceptable);
> > > > > +	int (*free_res)(struct iidc_core_dev_info *cdev_info,
> > > > > +			struct iidc_res *res);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	int (*request_reset)(struct iidc_core_dev_info *cdev_info,
> > > > > +			     enum iidc_reset_type reset_type);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	int (*update_vport_filter)(struct iidc_core_dev_info *cdev_info,
> > > > > +				   u16 vport_id, bool enable);
> > > > > +	int (*vc_send)(struct iidc_core_dev_info *cdev_info, u32 vf_id, u8
> *msg,
> > > > > +		       u16 len);
> > > > > +};
> > > >
> > > > What is this? There is only one implementation:
> > > >
> > > > static const struct iidc_core_ops ops = {
> > > > 	.alloc_res			= ice_cdev_info_alloc_res,
> > > > 	.free_res			= ice_cdev_info_free_res,
> > > > 	.request_reset			= ice_cdev_info_request_reset,
> > > > 	.update_vport_filter		= ice_cdev_info_update_vsi_filter,
> > > > 	.vc_send			= ice_cdev_info_vc_send,
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > So export and call the functions directly.
> > >
> > > No. Then we end up requiring ice to be loaded even when just want to
> > > use irdma with x722 [whose ethernet driver is "i40e"].
> >
> > So what? What does it matter to load a few extra kb of modules?
> 
> And if user cares about it, he will blacklist that module anyway.
> 
 blacklist ice when you just have an x722 card? How does that solve anything? You wont be able to load irdma then.

Shiraz