netdev - Re: [net-next 08/15] net/mlx5e: Add hairpin debugfs files

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: <20230111194608.7f15b9a1@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jan 2023 19:46:08 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 08/15] net/mlx5e: Add hairpin debugfs files

On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 15:01:31 -0800 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> Sorry i don't have much details here, Maybe Gal can chime in.. 
> but what i am sure of is changing the hairpin RQ/SQ configs comes
> with a risk.

Would be great if someone could chime in..

> >Plus IIRC you already have the EQ configuration via params.  
> 
> EQ is considered standard parameter in devlink.
> 
> We currently have 2 vendor specific params and they are related to
> steering pipeline/engines only.
> hairpin buffer/queue sizes is only a CX limitation, and implementation
> detail.
> 
> you can clearly see a pattern here, usually the steering pipeline
> requires vendor specific knobs :/ ..
> 
> Will you be ok if we moved hairpin config to devlink driver specific param
> ? given that we will create the vendor_specific.rst for easy tracking and
> grepping.

Alright, that sounds okay. But vendor_specific.rst needs to only cover
debugfs and ethtool private flags, right? Devlink params are already
documented in per-driver devlink docs, and splitting params into two
places would be odd.