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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:12:14 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.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>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
        "Lacombe, John S" <john.s.lacombe@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/23] iidc: Introduce iidc.h

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:50:43PM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote:

> Because it is an unnecessary thing to force a user to build/load drivers for
> which they don't have the HW for? 

Happens automatically in all distros, so I don't agree with this.

> The problem gets compounded if we have to do it for all future HW
> Intel PCI drivers, i.e. depends on ICE && ....

Then someday build a proper pluggable abstraction and put all your
ethernet drivers under it. 

Today you haven't done that and all we have a set of ops that only
work with one eth driver and a totally different set of functions that
only work with a different driver.

It is all just dead code until it gets finished and process is to not
merge dead code.

> There is a near-term Intel ethernet VF driver which will use IIDC to
> provide RDMA in the VF, and implement some of these .ops
> callbacks. There is also intent to move i40e to IIDC.

"near-term" We are now on year three of Intel talking about this
driver!

Get the bulk of the thing merged and deal with the rest in followup
patches.

> But in a unified irdma driver model connecting to multiple PCI gen
> drivers, I do think it serves a reason.

It is fine as a high level idea, but the implementation has to meet
kernel standards.

Jason