lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [RFC PATCH 00/10] net: hns3: Adds support of debugfs to HNS3 driver
Date
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for replying. Sorry, for not being prompt as I was
traveling.

Please find some further follow-up questions below

Salil.

> From: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-rdma-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Lunn
> Sent: Friday, November 9, 2018 10:44 PM
> To: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>
> Cc: davem@davemloft.net; yuvalm@mellanox.com; leon@kernel.org;
> Zhuangyuzeng (Yisen) <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>; lipeng (Y)
> <lipeng321@huawei.com>; mehta.salil@opnsrc.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org; Linuxarm
> <linuxarm@huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] net: hns3: Adds support of debugfs to
> HNS3 driver
>
> > 3. Debugfs looks more unstructured unlike sysfs. Is there any
> > de-facto standard of the user-api or drivers are allowed to
> > use it in any way to expose the information from kernel.
>
> Hi Salil
>
> You don't really have a user api using debugfs, because debugfs is
> unstable. Anything can change at any time. Any user tools which use
> debugfs can be expected to break at any time as the information in
> debugfs changes. debugfs is for debug, not to export an API. And in
> production systems, it is often not mounted.


Sure, I understand.

>
> As much as possible, you are recommended to use existing APIs,
> ethtool, devlink, etc.


Agreed. But what about if we want to expose anything related to
firmware to user-space using the debugfs, assuming we are presenting
information in structured way and not as a black-box to some user-space
application. Is it something which might be discouraged?

Many Thanks

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-11 16:13    [W:0.122 / U:0.476 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site