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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230504114421.51415018@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 11:44:21 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>, Vadim
 Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>, Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...a.com>,
 Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 poros <poros@...hat.com>, mschmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
 "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org"
 <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>, "Olech, Milena" <milena.olech@...el.com>,
 "Michalik, Michal" <michal.michalik@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v6 2/6] dpll: Add DPLL framework base functions

On Thu, 4 May 2023 19:51:38 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> What is the next intelligible element to identify DPLL device here?  
> >
> >I don't know. We can always add more as needed.
> >We presuppose that the devices are identifiable, so whatever info
> >is used to identify them goes here.  
> 
> Allright. So in case of ptp_ocp and mlx5, module_name and clock_id
> are enough. In case of ice, DPLL_A_TYPE, attr is the one to make
> distinction between the 2 dpll instances there
> 
> So for now, we can have:
>  CMD_GET_ID
>    -> DPLL_A_MODULE_NAME  
>       DPLL_A_CLOCK_ID
>       DPLL_A_TYPE
>    <- DPLL_A_ID
> 
> 
> if user passes a subset which would not provide a single match, we error
> out with -EINVAL and proper exack message. Makes sense?

Yup, that sounds good to me.

> >Same answer. Could be a name of the pin according to ASIC docs.
> >Could be the ball name for a BGA package. Anything that's meaningful.  
> 
> Okay, for pin, the type and label would probably do:
>  CMD_GET_PIN_ID
>    -> DPLL_A_MODULE_NAME  
>       DPLL_A_CLOCK_ID
>       DPLL_A_PIN_TYPE
>       DPLL_A_PIN_LABEL

Label sounds dangerously open ended, too. Would that be the SMA
connector label (i.e. front panel label)? Or also applicable to
internal pins? It'd be easier to talk details if we had the user
facing documentation that ships with these products.

>    <- DPLL_A_PIN_ID
> 
> Again, if user passes a subset which would not provide a single match,
> we error out with -EINVAL and proper exack message.
> 
> If there is only one pin for example, user query of DPLL_A_MODULE_NAME
> and DPLL_A_CLOCK_ID would do return a single match. No need to pass
> anything else.
> 
> I think this could work with both ice and ptp_ocp, correct guys?
> 
> For mlx5, I will have 2 or more pins with same module name, clock id
> and type. For these SyncE pins the label does not really make sense.
> But I don't have to query, because the PIN_ID is going to be exposed for
> netdev over RT netlink. Clicks.
> 
> Makes sense?