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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250306072916.GQ1955273@unreal>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 09:29:16 +0200
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...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 07:21:54PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> 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.

Yes, it can be structured like you proposed too or/and combined with my
idea https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20250303150015.GA1926949@unreal/

The most important part is that it needs to be group of maintainers.

> 
> 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?

I like Saeed's proposal "drivers/aux/", it is more short and catchy.

Thanks

> 
> Jason
>