netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] Introduce fwctl subystem

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Z8i2_9G86z14KbpB@x130>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 12:41:35 -0800
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com>,
	Aron Silverton <aron.silverton@...cle.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Itay Avraham <itayavr@...dia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
	Leonid Bloch <lbloch@...dia.com>, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
	"Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] Introduce fwctl subystem

On 05 Mar 20:28, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:17:19AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 3/5/25 8:08 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 02:32:54PM +0100, jgg@...dia.com wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 04:42:03PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> >>> I thought you were arguing that me opposing the addition was
>> >>> "maintainer overreach". As in me telling other parts of the kernel
>> >>> what is and isn't allowed. Do I not get a say what gets merged under
>> >>> drivers/net/ now?
>> >>
>> >> The PCI core drivers are a shared resource jointly maintained by all
>> >> the subsytems that use them. They are maintained by their respective
>> >> maintainers. Saeed/etc in this case.
>> >>
>> >> It would be inappropriate for your preferences to supersede Saeed's
>> >> when he is a maintainer of the mlx5_core driver and fwctl. Please try
>> >> and get Saeed on board with your plan.
>> >>
>> >> If the placement under drivers/net makes this confusing then we can
>> >> certainly change the directory names.
>> >
>> > According to how mlx5 driver is structured, and the rest of the advanced
>> > drivers in the same area are becoming as well, it would make sense to me
>> > to have mlx5 core in separate core directory, maintained directly by driver
>> > maintainer:
>> > drivers/core/mlx5/
>> > then each of the protocol auxiliary device lands in appropriate
>> > subsystem directory.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> This is how I have structured our drivers -- core driver for owning the
>> PCI device and hosting the APIs to communicate with hardware, an aux bus
>> and then smaller subsystem focused drivers for the aux devices that make
>> the device usable from different contexts.
>>
>> I think we are ready to start upstreaming, but I am waiting to see how
>> this falls out - to see if our core driver can land in a non-subsystem
>> specific location (e.g., drivers/core) or if it needs to go with fwctl
>> as a generic location.
>
>Do it right, and push it to drivers/core. I'm aware of at least one
>driver from huge company (not Nvidia) which is in preparation phase
>before upstreaming, and will fit nicely into this model.
>

How do you imagine this driver/core structure should look like? Who will be
the top dir maintainer? It should be something that is tightly coupled with
aux, currently aux is under drivers/base/auxiliary.c I think it should move 
to drivers/aux/auxiliary.c and device drivers should implement their own
aux buses, WH access APIs and probing/init logic under that directory
e.g: drivers/aux/mlx5/..