On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:28:31 +0200 Przemek Kitszel wrote: > On 4/11/25 13:11, Edward Cree wrote: > > On 09/04/2025 18:25, Nelson, Shannon wrote: > >> On 4/9/2025 7:39 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > AFAICT the argument on the other side is "it makes the driver look bad", > > which has (expletive)-all to do with engineering. > > Value often comes from firmware, anyway, in which case driver's (& core's) > > job is to be a dumb pipe, not go around 'validating' things. > > that way we will stick with the ugly, repetitive, overly bloated code, > repetitive and hard to fix in all places, (and repetitive) drivers > > yeah, good that we bikeshed on something so simple :) > If anyone is "strongly opposed", please say so once more, and we will > drop this patch. Otherwise we are going to keep it. Unrelated (I think?) this is a relatively big series so I don't want to race with it, but I think we should rename the defines. DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_GENERIC_x -> DEVLINK_VER_x ? You did some major devlink refactors, maybe you want to take this on? :) The 40 char defines lead to pretty ugly wrapping, and make constructs like: if (something) devlink_info_version_running_put(... impossible. We could also rename the helpers to s/_version// ..
