netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] devlink: add by-instance dump infra

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]

Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 10:24:37 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] devlink: add by-instance dump infra

On Thu, 5 Jan 2023 10:02:54 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 04:46:04AM CET, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
> >> What is "gen"? Generic netlink?  
> >
> >Generic devlink command. In other words the implementation 
> >is straightforward enough to factor out the common parts.  
> 
> Could it be "genl" then?

Why? What other kind of command is there?
The distinction is weird vs generic, not genl vs IDK-what.

> >> Do you plan to have more callbacks here? If no, wouldn't it be better
> >> to just have typedef and assign the pointer to the dump_one in
> >> devl_gen_cmds array?  
> >
> >If I find the time - yes, more refactoring is possible.  
> 
> Could you elaborate a bit more about that?

If I recall I was thinking about adding a "fill" op and policy related
info to the structure. The details would fall into place during coding..

> >You mean it doesn't have nl, cmd, dump_one in the name?
> >Could you *please* at least say what you want the names to be if you're
> >sending all those subjective nit picks? :/  
> 
> Well, I provided a suggested name, not sure why that was not clear.
> The point was s/dump/dumpit/ to match the op name.

Oh, just the "it" at the end? Sorry, I don't see the point.