netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 1/2] nfp: initialize netdev's dev

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: <DM6PR13MB37050D1FEE2A6C13A68C9325FC8E9@DM6PR13MB3705.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Mar 2023 03:27:56 +0000
From:   Yinjun Zhang <yinjun.zhang@...igine.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     Louis Peens <louis.peens@...igine.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        oss-drivers <oss-drivers@...igine.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 1/2] nfp: initialize netdev's dev_port with
 correct id

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:10:29 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 02:52:22 +0000 Yinjun Zhang wrote:
> > > Yes, but phys_port_name is still there, and can be used, right?
> > > So why add another attr?
> >
> > Yes, phys_port_name is still there. But some users prefer to use dev_port.
> > I don't add this new attr, it's already existed since
> > 3f85944fe207 ("net: Add sysfs file for port number").
> > I just make the attr's value correct.
> 
> You're using a different ID than phys_port_name, as far as I can tell :(
> When the port is not split will id == label, always?

You got the point. We create netdevs according to the port sequence in
eth_table from management firmware. I think M-FW will make sure
the sequence matches the port label id.