From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3DA939184B; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 11:45:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788176719; cv=none; b=lwMTAkpbf5nWVNIp5q1aBXaxLoSAYMF7Jz7Yz0kAIDT26KRu70RxgpDCnMjEvgQdL72YObIhqC0kScZOu9CZ5cV+QTH/qzJnExYSlYv+ojNUCviSJ1kY8BMVhK11iBZKzmNxDKi9NXwNZ1bxElNQKeeGuDp/vU0Q56Ddt17pwVs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788176719; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4hvTHiztlQOiP907maCPpn5aQhR1xGnaZSzYHabZFhY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition; b=epQA/TvUAJWJt2ADyGRdUgtk5Icwuc0mva5Hx02lLuA2fPLSoeZCexOU4x15d9dkvFSWxJb/c4n5EhDz5CfN+6n00C7gTiAWqTXrsuR/qsWlsgrKxGgHWUQsCFRzv+F5WWkJTil6p0xMGJ+jLSM0Te49+IdheJKflaa5Z2k/Sho= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=cclrgie1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="cclrgie1" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 182301F000E9; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 11:45:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788176718; bh=MGM5UjBFTBl6z/Tmn5z2Mz6KhaOwI7O+2FjYZ4TU9vE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=cclrgie1c/zQ/qUNz+5jQ5Fyp7rGqXNHQK5CMuKXGOOIxvQ0yx4Ajp0BYXaDLfUy8 8x6RAvO/F9bNR+6EU1FYnrO9CKRvQu/drwaKCFBDDHoBLPmGyj7hVpcFrf0rKqa4o3 l+kZfTXifyTJv+44ACiLmE5CQ4H/CUaTdUNymPY4OrpI8dV6uFFhAHCzu1/UQJ1Xne 6ud2nJGT6O7MZn7un0z5IRBF9IlmTEzQ8rZukQ7YJwCKedf0JMTRb57L4mwHUJMeAe 7hVzmQzxUPW53Ez/2VeMEVMOa6wC2bIQRLEyLdlw2T084Y/4Prh5IySZ51GJT7GjOL iddabrOKiaOlg== Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 14:45:15 +0300 From: Konstantin Sinyuk To: Jiri Pirko Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Maarten Lankhorst , Francois Dugast , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Donald Hunter , Jakub Kicinski , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Ilia Levi , Rodrigo Vivi , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, jgg@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/12] drm/fabric: vendor-neutral topology infrastructure for scale-up accelerator interconnects Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 02:35:16PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Using generic netlink instead of sysfs for this makes a lot of sense, > but it may be a bit odd to use it outside the networking area. > I've been struggling with the same in another non-networking use-case > as well. Agreed, and the series shows the friction. The namespace handling is nominal, and CAP_NET_ADMIN as the mutation gate is another borrowed part of the model. I went into that in more detail in the reply to Jason. > - One character device per registered instance, not one global family. > Access control is the file: udev rules, ACLs, an fd passed into > a container. The fd-based access and event model addresses real problems with one global family and one multicast group. The main question is what the CTLV instance would represent. A fabric can span multiple devices and has its own lifetime. An endpoint can also be detached from a fabric with fabric-id 0 and continue to exist. A character device per accelerator would not provide the same global view as the current family. Can a CTLV instance represent a multi-device fabric or the global fabric registry rather than one physical device? > Would this make sense to use for you? In principle, yes. I cannot base this series on an out-of-tree pre-RFC, but the fabric, endpoint, port and peer model is separate from the current serialization. Changing transports would be more than regeneration, so I will read the draft before saying more. Thanks, Konstantin