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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Yzmhm4jSn/5EtG2l@nanopsycho> Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2022 16:35:07 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: Vadim Fedorenko <vfedorenko@...ek.ru>, Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>, Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...com>, Aya Levin <ayal@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Create common DPLL/clock configuration API Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 04:18:27PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote: >On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 07:47:24 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >> Sure, but more hw does not mean you can't use sysfs. Take netdev as an >> >> example. The sysfs exposed for it is implemented net/core/net-sysfs.c >> >> and is exposed for all netdev instances, no matter what the >> >> driver/hardware is. >> > >> >Wait, *you* are suggesting someone uses sysfs instead of netlink? >> > >> >Could you say more because I feel like that's kicking the absolute. >> >> I don't understand why that would be a problem. > >Why did you do devlink over netlink then? There were good reasons why to use netlink, many of those. I find it redundant to list them here. >The bus device is already there in sysfs. > >> What I'm trying to say >> is, perhaps sysfs is a better API for this purpose. The API looks very >> neat and there is no probabilito of huge grow. > >"this API is nice and small" said everyone about every new API ever, >APIs grow. Sure, what what are the odds. > >> Also, with sysfs, you >> don't need userspace app to do basic work with the api. In this case, I >> don't see why the app is needed. > >Yes, with the YAML specs you don't need a per-family APP. >A generic app can support any family, just JSON in JSON out. >DPLL-nl will come with a YAML spec. Yeah, but still. For sysfs, you don't need any app. Just saying. > >> These are 2 biggest arguments for sysfs in this case as I see it. > >2 biggest arguments? Is "this API is small" one of the _biggest_ >arguments you see? I don't think it's an argument at all. The OCP PTP >driver started small and now its not small. And the files don't even >follow sysfs rules. Trust me, we have some experience here :/ No problem. I don't mind one bit, don't get me wrong :) I just pointed out alternative. > >As I said to you in private I feel like there may be some political >games being played here, so I'd like to urge you to focus on real >issues. I don't know anything about any politics. I don't care about it at all to be honest. You know me :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists