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

Message-ID: <20211125205800.74e1b07b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Nov 2021 20:58:00 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Sunil Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] octeontx2-nicvf: Add netdev interface support for SDP
 VF devices

On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 09:44:10 +0530 Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
> > 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 ?

Yes.

> If customers want to use upstream kernel with-in endpoint and not
> proprietary SDK, why to impose restrictions.

Because our APIs and interfaces have associated semantics. That's
the primary thing we care about upstream. You need to use or create
standard interfaces, not come up with your own thing and retrofit it
into one of the APIs. Not jam PTP configuration thru devlink params,
or use netdevs to talk to your FW because its convenient. Trust me,
you're not the first one to come up with this idea.

Frankly if the octeontx2 team continues on its current path I think
the driver should be removed. You bring no benefit to the community
I don't see why we'd give you the time of day.