netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/6] ethtool: Add ability to control transceiver modules' power mode

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: <20210824233147.3ppmq4xk2n3n7afz@lion.mk-sys.cz>
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 01:31:47 +0200
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To:     "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "pali@...nel.org" <pali@...nel.org>,
        "jiri@...dia.com" <jiri@...dia.com>,
        "vadimp@...dia.com" <vadimp@...dia.com>,
        "mlxsw@...dia.com" <mlxsw@...dia.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/6] ethtool: Add ability to control
 transceiver modules' power mode

On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 11:18:56PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 4:13 PM
> > To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
> > Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; davem@...emloft.net; andrew@...n.ch;
> > mkubecek@...e.cz; pali@...nel.org; Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>;
> > jiri@...dia.com; vadimp@...dia.com; mlxsw@...dia.com; Ido Schimmel
> > <idosch@...dia.com>
> > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/6] ethtool: Add ability to control
> > transceiver modules' power mode
> > 
> > On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 16:03:39 +0300 Ido Schimmel wrote:
[...]
> > > +/**
> > > + * struct ethtool_module_power_mode_params - module power mode
> > parameters
> > > + * @policy: The power mode policy enforced by the host for the plug-in
> > module.
> > > + * @mode: The operational power mode of the plug-in module. Should be
> > filled by
> > > + * device drivers on get operations.
> > 
> > Indent continuation lines by one tab.
> > 
> > > + * @mode_valid: Indicates the validity of the @mode field. Should be set by
> > > + * device drivers on get operations when a module is plugged-in.
> > 
> > Should we make a firm decision on whether we want to use these kind of
> > valid bits or choose invalid defaults? As you may guess my preference
> > is the latter since that's what I usually do, that way drivers don't
> > have to write two fields.
> > 
> > Actually I think this may be the first "valid" in ethtool, I thought we
> > already had one but I don't see it now..
> > 
> 
> 
> coalesce settings have a valid mode don't they? Or at least an
> "accepted modes"?

That's different, IIUC. In coalesce settings, the driver declares which
parameters are allowed in "set" requests so that this part of request
checks can be done in the general ethtool code rather than in each
driver separately. Here the "valid" field says whether mode field holds
a meaningful value or should be ignored.

Michal