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: <4c55e1ae-8cc1-463e-b81f-2bbae4ae4eed@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 10:31:51 +0100
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...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 3/11/25 2:59 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 12:23:19PM +0100, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 3/6/25 12:21 AM, 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.
>>
>> why no uapi? Core driver can have knowledge of h/w resources across all
>> use cases. For example, our core driver supports a generid netlink based
>> dump (no set operations; get and dump only so maybe that should be the
>> restriction?) of all objects regardless of how created -- netdev, ib,
>> etc. -- and with much more detail.
> 
> Because, we want to make sure that UAPI will be aligned with relevant
> subsystems without any way to bypass them.
> 
> Thanks

I hope there will be an open mind on get / dump style introspection apis
here. Devices can work support and work within limited subsystem APIs
and also allow the dumping of full essential and relevant contexts for a
device.

More specifically, I do not see netdev APIs ever recognizing RDMA
concepts like domains and memory regions. For us, everything is relative
to a domain and a region - e.g., whether a queue is created for a netdev
device or an IB QP both use the same common internal APIs.  I would
prefer not to use fwctl for something so basic.