netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/5] devlink: Add unique identifier to devlink port function

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: <20250428111909.16dd7488@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 11:19:09 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>
Cc: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "Eric
 Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon
 Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>, Jiri
 Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed
 <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>, Mark Bloch
 <mbloch@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/5] devlink: Add unique identifier to devlink
 port function

On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:11:04 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> > Makes sense, tho, could you please use UUID?
> > Let's use industry standards when possible, not "arbitrary strings".  
> 
> UUID is limited, like it has to be 128 bits, while here it is variable 
> length up to the vendor.
> We would like to keep it flexible per vendor. If vendor wants to use 
> UUID here, it will work too.

Could you please provide at least one clear user scenario for 
the discussion? Matching up the ports to function is presumably
a means to an end for the user.