netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 02/14] devlink: split out core code

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: <Y7VL6P0hfCEvBFzV@nanopsycho>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:50:32 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/14] devlink: split out core code

Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 05:16:24AM CET, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>Move core code into a separate file. It's spread around the main
>file which makes refactoring and figuring out how devlink works
>harder.
>
>Move the xarray, all the most core devlink instance code out like
>locking, ref counting, alloc, register, etc. Leave port stuff in
>basic.c, if we want to move port code it'd probably be to its own file.

leftover.c

>
>Rename devlink_netdevice_event() to make it clear that it only touches
>ports (that's the only change which isn't a pure code move).

Did you do any other changes on the move? I believe that for patches
like this that move a lot of code it is beneficial to move the code "as
is". The changes could be done in a separate patches, for the ease of
review purposes. Could you please?