netdev - Re: [PATCH ethtool-next 09/14] qsfp: Add JSON output handling to --module-info in SFF8636 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: <5efb4e9a-6520-4a36-a946-caa545e68f15@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 13:37:22 +0200
From: Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>
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 09/14] qsfp: Add JSON output handling to
 --module-info in SFF8636 modules

On 29/01/2025 0:13, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 13:23:42 +0000 Danielle Ratson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 13:56:30 +0200 Danielle Ratson wrote:  
>>>> +		open_json_object("extended_identifier");
>>>> +		print_int(PRINT_JSON, "value", "0x%02x",
>>>> +			  map->page_00h[SFF8636_EXT_ID_OFFSET]);  
>>>
>>> Hm, why hex here?
>>> Priority for JSON output is to make it easy to handle in code, rather than easy
>>> to read. Hex strings need extra manual decoding, no?  
>>
>> I kept the same convention as in the regular output.
>> And as agreed in Daniel's design those hex fields remain hex fields
>> and are followed by a description field.
>>
>> Do you think otherwise?  
> 
> I have a weak preference to never use hex strings.
> I have regretted using hex strings in JSON multiple times but haven't
> regretted using plain integers, yet.
> 

+1, jq won't be able to parse such json.