netdev - RE: [External] : RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2] iavf: clarify VLAN add/delete log messages and lower log level

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: <IA3PR11MB8986BCA52B33D7A426C139A7E5C5A@IA3PR11MB8986.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 10:29:08 +0000
From: "Loktionov, Aleksandr" <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
To: "Kitszel, Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, ALOK TIWARI
	<alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>, "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
CC: "alok.a.tiwarilinux@...il.com" <alok.a.tiwarilinux@...il.com>, "Lobakin,
 Aleksander" <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>, "andrew+netdev@...n.ch"
	<andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "edumazet@...gle.com"
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>, "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [External] : RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2] iavf:
 clarify VLAN add/delete log messages and lower log level



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kitszel, Przemyslaw <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 10:42 AM
> To: Loktionov, Aleksandr <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>; ALOK TIWARI
> <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>; Nguyen, Anthony L
> <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
> Cc: alok.a.tiwarilinux@...il.com; Lobakin, Aleksander
> <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>; andrew+netdev@...n.ch;
> kuba@...nel.org; davem@...emloft.net; edumazet@...gle.com;
> pabeni@...hat.com; horms@...nel.org; intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [External] : RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2]
> iavf: clarify VLAN add/delete log messages and lower log level
> 
> 
> >>>> - Rephrase the message to: "[vvfl|vvfl_v2] Too many VLAN
> >> [add|delete]
> >>>>     requests; splitting into multiple messages to PF".
> >>>>
> >>>> Suggested-by: Przemek Kitszel<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari<alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> v1 -> v2
> >>>> remove "\n" b/w message
> >>>> added vvfl and vvfl_v2 prefix
> >>> Why vvfl and vvfl_v2 prefix? For me 'virtchnl:'  'virtchnl v2:'
> >> looks more clear.
> >>> Can you explain?
> >>
> >> I am trying to follow the code path, as vvfl refers to the virtchnl
> >> VLAN filter list. It’s just a way to segregate the logic between
> the
> >> if/else conditions.
> >> Either 'virtchnl:' or 'virtchnl v2:' also sound good to me.
> >>
> >> Happy to go with whichever you prefer.
> >>
> > There is only single mention of vvfl recently (just 4years) and only
> in iavf driver.
> > virtchnl exist for decade or so:
> >
> > linux/drivers/net$ grep -rn vvfl | wc -l
> > 43
> > linux/drivers/net$ grep -rn virtchnl | wc -l
> > 1240
> >
> > Please use more common historical prefix.
> >
> > Thank you
> but keep in mind that "virtchnl v2" is a completely different thing
> introduced by idpf
> 
> here we are really talking about more and more subtle things I would
> just say:
> Too many VLAN add (v1) requests; splitting into multiple messages to
> PF and similar for other cases
> 
> I hope that this will make everyone happy (feel free to keep my tags)

Yes Przemek, you pointed a problem, here virtchnl_v2 does not fit (because it's different thing from idpf).
But anyway it's better to have virtlchnl: prefix to preserve consistency.
So, I correct my opinion, and advise:

Use virtchnl: as the dmesg prefix in iavf
  - Rationale: iavf speaks virtchnl v1; “vvfl” is an internal detail
    (VLAN filter list) that’s not a stable cross‑driver concept and
    will not mean much to most readers.
    virtchnl: is the de‑facto, long‑standing tag across drivers and reviews.
  - Do not prefix with virtchnl v2: in iavf. “virtchnl v2” is the IDPF world;
    using it in iavf will confuse folks and grep results.

I propose:
"virtchnl: Too many VLAN add (v1) requests; splitting into multiple messages to PF"
"virtchnl: Too many VLAN delete (v1) requests; splitting into multiple messages to PF"
i.e:
  - Put “(v1)” in the sentence (not the prefix) to disambiguate from IDPF/virtchnl v2.
  - Keep “PF” (physical function) in the text—well‑known term to iavf users and netdev reviewers.
  - Avoid “vvfl”/“vvfl_v2” in user‑facing logs; it’s an internal identifier, not a user‑visible protocol.
  - Keep virtchnl: prefix for all virtchnl protocol‑related logs in iavf (negotiation, capabilities, message batching, etc.).

With the best regards
Alex