netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/4] ynl: YAML netlink protocol descriptions

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: <20220811080152.2dbd82c2@hermes.local>
Date:   Thu, 11 Aug 2022 08:01:52 -0700
From:   Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, sdf@...gle.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com,
        vadfed@...com, johannes@...solutions.net, jiri@...nulli.us,
        dsahern@...nel.org, fw@...len.de, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/4] ynl: YAML netlink protocol descriptions

On Wed, 10 Aug 2022 21:47:01 -0700
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Aug 2022 21:15:34 -0700 Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > Would rather this be part of iproute2 rather than requiring it
> > to be maintained separately and part of the kernel tree.  
> 
> I don't understand what you're trying to say. What is "this", 
> what is "separate" from what?

I am saying that ynl could live as a standalone project or as
part of the iproute2 tools collection.

> 
> Did I fall victim of the "if the cover letter is too long nobody
> actually reads it" problem? Or am I simply too tired to parse?
> 
> iproute2 is welcome to use the protocol descriptions like any other
> user space, but I'm intending to codegen kernel code based on the YAML:

Ok, that makes sense then. I was hoping that user configuration
of network devices could be done with YAML. But probably that is
best left networkd, netplan, and others.


> >> On the kernel side the YAML spec can be used to generate:
> >>  - the C uAPI header
> >>  - documentation of the protocol as a ReST file
> >>  - policy tables for input attribute validation
> >>  - operation tables  
> 
> So how can it not be in the kernel tree?

As code generator then sure.