netdev - RE: [PATCH ethtool-next 08/14] cmis: Enable JSON output support in CMIS modules

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:
 <DM6PR12MB4516090628694AEA53EEB3A0D8EE2@DM6PR12MB4516.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 09:40:21 +0000
From: Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "mkubecek@...e.cz"
	<mkubecek@...e.cz>, "matt@...verse.com.au" <matt@...verse.com.au>,
	"daniel.zahka@...il.com" <daniel.zahka@...il.com>, Amit Cohen
	<amcohen@...dia.com>, NBU-mlxsw <NBU-mlxsw@...hange.nvidia.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH ethtool-next 08/14] cmis: Enable JSON output support in
 CMIS modules

> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> Sent: Monday, 27 January 2025 22:13
> To: Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; mkubecek@...e.cz; matt@...verse.com.au;
> daniel.zahka@...il.com; Amit Cohen <amcohen@...dia.com>; NBU-mlxsw
> <nbu-mlxsw@...hange.nvidia.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool-next 08/14] cmis: Enable JSON output support in
> CMIS modules
> 
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 13:56:29 +0200 Danielle Ratson wrote:
> >        "tx_loss_of_signal": "None",
> >         "rx_loss_of_lock": "None",
> >         "tx_loss_of_lock": "None",
> >         "tx_fault": "None",
> 
> Why "None" in this case rather than true/false/null ?

Alignment again.. I can change it to false, but null seems not here and not there.

> 
> >         "module_state": 3,
> >         "module_state_description": "ModuleReady",
> >         "low_pwr_allow_request_hw": false,
> >         "low_pwr_request_sw": false,
> >         "module_temperature": 36.8203,
> >         "module_temperature_units": "degrees C",
> >         "module_voltage": 3.3385,
> >         "module_voltage_units": "V",
> >         "laser_tx_bias_current": [
> > 0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,0.0000 ],
> >         "laser_tx_bias_current_units": "mA",
> 
> How do you think about the units?
> If they may differ module to module - should we aim to normalize those?