netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 01/15] devlink: move code to a dedicated directory

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: <c7c98e4a-5f41-2095-c500-c141ea56a21a@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:29:02 -0800
From:   Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
CC:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <leon@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 01/15] devlink: move code to a dedicated directory



On 12/15/2022 11:09 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:51:43 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> net/Makefile                            | 1 +
>>> net/core/Makefile                       | 1 -
>>> net/devlink/Makefile                    | 3 +++
>>> net/{core/devlink.c => devlink/basic.c} | 0  
>>
>> What's "basic" about it? It sounds a bit misleading.
> 
> Agreed, but try to suggest a better name ;)  the_rest_of_it.c ? :)
> 

I tried to think of something, but you already use core elsewhere in the
series. If our long term goal really is to split everything out then
maybe "leftover.c"? Or just "devlink/devlink.c"

>>> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 net/devlink/Makefile
>>> rename net/{core/devlink.c => devlink/basic.c} (100%)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/Makefile b/net/Makefile
>>> index 6a62e5b27378..0914bea9c335 100644
>>> --- a/net/Makefile
>>> +++ b/net/Makefile
>>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_BPFILTER)		+= bpfilter/
>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PACKET)		+= packet/
>>> obj-$(CONFIG_NET_KEY)		+= key/
>>> obj-$(CONFIG_BRIDGE)		+= bridge/
>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_NET_DEVLINK)	+= devlink/  
>>
>> Hmm, as devlink is not really designed to be only networking thing,
>> perhaps this is good opportunity to move out of net/ and change the
>> config name to "CONFIG_DEVLINK" ?
> 
> Nothing against it, but don't think it belongs in this patch.
> So I call scope creep.

Right. I think this patch set focusing on just the iteration for dumping
is good.