netdev - RE: [PATCH v12 vfio 3/7] vfio/pds: register with the pds

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: <BN9PR11MB52761F84D9EDF16B158AC9A18C02A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 02:25:17 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@....com>, Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@....com>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "alex.williamson@...hat.com"
	<alex.williamson@...hat.com>, "jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
	"yishaih@...dia.com" <yishaih@...dia.com>,
	"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com" <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>
CC: "shannon.nelson@....com" <shannon.nelson@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v12 vfio 3/7] vfio/pds: register with the pds_core PF

> From: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@....com>
> Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2023 3:10 PM
> 
> On 7/21/2023 2:01 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper
> caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> >
> >
> >> From: Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@....com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2023 6:35 AM
> >>
> >> @@ -34,12 +34,13 @@ enum pds_core_vif_types {
> >>
> >>   #define PDS_DEV_TYPE_CORE_STR        "Core"
> >>   #define PDS_DEV_TYPE_VDPA_STR        "vDPA"
> >> -#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_VFIO_STR        "VFio"
> >> +#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_VFIO_STR        "vfio"
> >>   #define PDS_DEV_TYPE_ETH_STR "Eth"
> >>   #define PDS_DEV_TYPE_RDMA_STR        "RDMA"
> >>   #define PDS_DEV_TYPE_LM_STR  "LM"
> >>
> >>   #define PDS_VDPA_DEV_NAME     "."
> >> PDS_DEV_TYPE_VDPA_STR
> >> +#define PDS_LM_DEV_NAME              PDS_CORE_DRV_NAME "."
> >> PDS_DEV_TYPE_LM_STR "." PDS_DEV_TYPE_VFIO_STR
> >>
> >
> > then should the name be changed to PDS_VFIO_LM_DEV_NAME?
> >
> > Or is mentioning *LM* important? what would be the problem to just
> > use "pds_core.vfio"?
> 
> LM is important for the device. I don't plan to change this.

What about in the future VDPA also wants to gain migration support?
with VFIO_STR in the name does it make more sense to at least
define the name as PDS_VFIO_LM_DEV_NAME?