netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v6 2/6] dpll: Add DPLL framework base functions

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8e2050f5-6476-9048-c33e-100a039ba3b4@linux.dev>
Date:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 11:20:58 +0100
From:   Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
        poros <poros@...hat.com>, mschmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v6 2/6] dpll: Add DPLL framework base functions

On 27/04/2023 09:05, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 2023-04-17 at 12:49 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> [resend with fixed CC list]
>>
>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 18:23:15 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>> What is index? I thought you don't want an index and yet there is one,
>>>> just scoped by random attributes :(
>>>
>>> Index internal within a single instance. Like Intel guys, they have 1
>>> clock wired up with multiple DPLLs. The driver gives every DPLL index.
>>> This is internal, totally up to the driver decision. Similar concept to
>>> devlink port index.
>>
>> devlink port index ended up as a pretty odd beast with drivers encoding
>> various information into it, using locally grown schemes.
>>
>> Hard no on doing that in dpll, it should not be exposed to the user.
> 
> I'm replying here just in case the even the above reply was lost.
> 
> I guess the last remark resolved this specific discussion.
> 
> @Vadim, @Arkadiusz, even if net-next is currently closed, there are no
> restrictions for RFC patches: feel free to share v7 when it fits you
> better!

Hi Paolo!
Thanks for reminder, the new version is almost ready, I was a bit 
distracted by other burning issues. Hopefully I'll publish it till the 
end of the week.