netdev - Re: Fw: [EXT] Re: [PATCH] octeontx2-nicvf: Add netdev interface support for SDP VF devices

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+sq2CdrO-Zsf5zAj9UbAqVpKdbxeP+QoDAJ6dK2hwDmmuQQ8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Nov 2021 09:44:10 +0530
From:   Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@...il.com>
To:     Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Sunil Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: [EXT] Re: [PATCH] octeontx2-nicvf: Add netdev interface
 support for SDP VF devices

> ________________________________
> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 8:38 PM
> To: Radha Mohan <mohun106@...il.com>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org <netdev@...r.kernel.org>; David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH] octeontx2-nicvf: Add netdev interface support for SDP VF devices
>
> External Email
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:00:49 -0800 Radha Mohan wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:27 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 18:21:04 -0800 Radha Mohan wrote:
> > > > This patch adds netdev interface for SDP VFs. This interface can be used
> > > > to communicate with a host over PCIe when OcteonTx is in PCIe Endpoint
> > > > mode.
> > >
> > > All your SDP/SDK/management interfaces do not fit into our netdev
> > > model of the world and should be removed upstream.
> >
> > SDP is our System DMA Packet Interface which sends/receives network
> > packets to NIX block. It is similar to CGX, LBK blocks but only
> > difference is the medium being PCIe. So if you have accepted that I
> > believe you can accept this as well.
>
> Nope, I have not accepted that. I was just too lazy to send a revert
> after it was merged.

What is the objection here ?
Is kernel netdev not supposed to be used with-in end-point ?
If customers want to use upstream kernel with-in endpoint and not
proprietary SDK, why to impose restrictions.

Thanks,
Sunil.