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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20250305232154.GB354511@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 19:21:54 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, 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 Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 12:41:35PM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote:

> How do you imagine this driver/core structure should look like? Who
> will be the top dir maintainer?

I would set something like this up more like DRM. Every driver
maintainer gets commit rights, some rules about no uAPIs, or at least
other acks before merging uAPI. Use the tree for staging shared
branches.

Driver maintainers with the most commits per cycle does the PR or
something like that.

There is no subsystem or cross-driver entanglement so there is no real
need for gatekeeping.

It would be a good opportunity to help more people engage with the
kernel process and learn the full maintainer flow.

> 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/..

That makes sense to me. I would expect everything in this collection
to be PCI drivers spawing aux devices.

drivers/aux_core/ or something like that, perhaps?

Jason