Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751610AbbGKSgR (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jul 2015 14:36:17 -0400 Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com ([209.172.62.77]:61429 "EHLO mail.savoirfairelinux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751119AbbGKSgQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jul 2015 14:36:16 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 14:36:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Vivien Didelot To: David Cc: netdev , Guenter Roeck , andrew@lunn.ch, linux-kernel , kernel Message-ID: <1092744390.7730.1436639772848.JavaMail.zimbra@savoirfairelinux.com> In-Reply-To: <20150710.230120.1590955832899872718.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1436476409-5033-1-git-send-email-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <20150710.230120.1590955832899872718.davem@davemloft.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add write access to debugfs regs file MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.6.0_GA_1153 (ZimbraWebClient - FF39 (Linux)/8.6.0_GA_1153) Thread-Topic: mv88e6xxx: add write access to debugfs regs file Thread-Index: bIeJHa5eDXe+tx+iIVq1seiZ43t6ug== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2431 Lines: 68 Hi David, On Jul 11, 2015, at 2:01 AM, David davem@davemloft.net wrote: > From: Vivien Didelot > Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:13:29 -0400 > >> Allow write access to the regs file in the debugfs interface, with the >> following parameters: >> >> echo > regs >> >> Where "name" is the register name (as shown in the header row), "reg" is >> the register address (as shown in the first column) and "value" is the >> 16-bit value. e.g.: >> >> echo GLOBAL 1a 5550 > regs >> >> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot > > I don't know about this. > > This starts to smell like a back door for proprietary userspace SDKs to > program the switch hardware. > > Yes, they can do it via other mechanisms, but we don't have to make it > any eaiser for them either. I agree with you and I wouldn't want that neither. > If you want to poke registers, hack the module just like any other > person with appropriate privileges can do. I'm not sure what you mean. Keeping some custom patches in our local tree? > Frankly, all of this debugfs crap in the DSA drivers smells like poo. > I don't like it _AT_ _ALL_, and I shouldn't have allowed any of it > into the tree in the first place. > > I might just remove it all myself, it bothers me so much. > > Fetching information should be done by well typed, generic, interfaces > that apply to any similar device or object. All of this debugfs stuff > smells of hacks and special case crap that's only usable for one > device type and that makes it the single most terrible interface to > give to users. In the meantime, this is really useful for development. i.e. ensuring a good switchdev/DSA interaction without being able to read and write directly the hardware VLAN table, is a bit a PITA. A dynamic debugfs looked appropriate. On the other hand, the mv88e6xxx driver gets cluttered with all this code. I'd gladly move all this code in a mv88e6xxx-debugfs.c file, and conditionally compile it with: mv88e6xxx_drv-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS) += mv88e6xxx-debugfs.o similar to what the i2400m driver does. Would that be appreciated? Thanks, -v -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/