netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] dpll: documentation on DPLL subsystem interface

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]

Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 11:27:27 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>, vadfed@...a.com,
	jonathan.lemon@...il.com, pabeni@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, vadfed@...com,
	jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com,
	saeedm@...dia.com, leon@...nel.org, richardcochran@...il.com,
	sj@...nel.org, javierm@...hat.com, ricardo.canuelo@...labora.com,
	mst@...hat.com, tzimmermann@...e.de, michal.michalik@...el.com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jacek.lawrynowicz@...ux.intel.com,
	airlied@...hat.com, ogabbay@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de,
	nipun.gupta@....com, axboe@...nel.dk, linux@...y.sk,
	masahiroy@...nel.org, benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com,
	geert+renesas@...der.be, milena.olech@...el.com, kuniyu@...zon.com,
	liuhangbin@...il.com, hkallweit1@...il.com, andy.ren@...cruise.com,
	razor@...ckwall.org, idosch@...dia.com, lucien.xin@...il.com,
	nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, phil@....cc, claudiajkang@...il.com,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	poros@...hat.com, mschmidt@...hat.com, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
	vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] dpll: documentation on DPLL subsystem
 interface

Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 06:38:01PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:55:11 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> +``'pin': [{
>> >> + {'clock-id': 282574471561216,
>> >> +  'module-name': 'ice',
>> >> +  'pin-dpll-caps': 4,
>> >> +  'pin-id': 13,
>> >> +  'pin-parent': [{'pin-id': 2, 'pin-state': 'connected'},
>> >> +                 {'pin-id': 3, 'pin-state': 'disconnected'},
>> >> +                 {'id': 0, 'pin-direction': 'input'},
>> >> +                 {'id': 1, 'pin-direction': 'input'}],
>> >> +  'pin-type': 'synce-eth-port'}
>> >> +}]``  
>> >
>> >It seems like pin-parent is overloaded, can we split it into two
>> >different nests?  
>> 
>> Yeah, we had it as two and converged to this one. The thing is, the rest
>> of the attrs are the same for both parent pin and parent device. I link
>> it this way a bit better. No strong feeling.
>
>Do you mean the same attribute enum / "space" / "set"?

Yeah, that is my understanding. Arkadiusz, could you please clarify?


>In the example above the attributes present don't seem to overlap.
>For user space its an extra if to sift thru the objects under
>pin-parent.
>
>> >Also sounds like setting pin attrs and pin-parent attrs should be
>> >different commands.  
>> 
>> Could be, but what't the benefit? Also, you are not configuring
>> pin-parent. You are configuring pin:pin-parent tuple. Basically the pin
>> configuration as a child. So this is mainly config of the pin itsest
>> Therefore does not really make sense to me to split to two comments.
>
>Clarity of the API. If muxing everything thru few calls was the goal
>we should also have very few members in struct dpll_pin_ops, and we
>don't.

How the the internal kernel api related to the uapi? I mean, it's quite
common to have 1:N relationsip between cmd and op. I have to be missing
your point. Could you be more specific please?

Current code presents PIN_SET command with accepts structured set of
attribute to be set. The core-driver api is pretty clear. Squashing to
a single op would be disaster. Having one command per attr looks like an
overkill without any real benefit. How exactly do you propose to change
this?