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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 17:12:51 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] net/mlx5: Introduce devlink param to disable SF aux dev probe On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:17 +0200 Moshe Shemesh wrote: > v1->v2: > - updated example to make clear SF port and SF device creation PFs > - added example when SF port and device creation PFs are on different hosts How does this address my comments? We will not define Linux APIs based on what your firmware can or cannot do today. Can we somehow avoid having another frustrating and drawn out discussion that hinges on that point? Otherwise, why the global policy and all the hoops to jump thru? User wants a device with a vnet, give them a device with a vnet. You left out from your steps how ESW learns that the device has to be spawned. Given there's some form of communication between user intent and ESW the location of the two is completely irrelevant. You were right to treat the two cases as equivalent in the cover letter for v1.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists