netdev - Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 10/14] pds_core: add auxiliary

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: <20230401182701.GA831478@unreal>
Date:   Sat, 1 Apr 2023 21:27:01 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@....com>
Cc:     brett.creeley@....com, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        kuba@...nel.org, drivers@...sando.io, jiri@...nulli.us
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 10/14] pds_core: add auxiliary_bus devices

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 04:46:24PM -0700, Shannon Nelson wrote:
> An auxiliary_bus device is created for each vDPA type VF at VF probe
> and destroyed at VF remove.  The VFs are always removed on PF remove, so
> there should be no issues with VFs trying to access missing PF structures.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/Makefile |   1 +
>  drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/auxbus.c | 142 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/core.h   |   6 +
>  drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/main.c   |  36 +++++-
>  include/linux/pds/pds_auxbus.h             |  16 +++
>  include/linux/pds/pds_common.h             |   1 +
>  6 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/auxbus.c
>  create mode 100644 include/linux/pds/pds_auxbus.h

I feel that this auxbus usage is still not correct.

The idea of auxiliary devices is to partition physical device (for
example PCI device) to different sub-devices, where every sub-device
belongs to different sub-system. It is not intended to create per-VF
devices. 

In your case, you should create XXX vDPA auxiliary devices which are
connected in one-to-one scheme to their PCI VF counterpart.

Thanks