netdev - Re: [PATCH ethtool 0/2] module_common: adjust the JSON output for per-lane signals

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: <aDjnf-OMI9Ot2pC5@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 16:02:23 -0700
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: mkubecek@...e.cz, danieller@...dia.com, idosch@...sch.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool 0/2] module_common: adjust the JSON output for
 per-lane signals

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 07:20:31AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> I got some feedback from users trying to integrate the SFP JSON
> output to Meta's monitoring systems. The loss / fault signals
> are currently a bit awkward to parse. This patch set changes
> the format, is it still okay to merge it (as a fix?)
> I think it's a worthwhile improvement, not sure how many people
> depend on the current JSON format after 1 release..
> 
> Jakub Kicinski (2):
>   module_common: always print per-lane status in JSON
>   module_common: print loss / fault signals as bool
> 
>  module-common.c | 10 +++-------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

Code seems reasonable to me; no idea on whether its still okay to
merge as a fix, but I agree it seems like a worthwhile improvement.

Reviewed-by: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>