Re: [PATCH net v2 1/4] auxiliary: Support hexadecimal ids

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 11:49:37AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 7/16/25 01:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 08:01:07PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> >> Support creating auxiliary devices with the id included as part of the
> >> name. This allows for hexadecimal ids, which may be more appropriate for
> >> auxiliary devices created as children of memory-mapped devices. If an
> >> auxiliary device's id is set to AUXILIARY_DEVID_NONE, the name must
> >> be of the form "name.id".
> >> 
> >> With this patch, dmesg logs from an auxiliary device might look something
> >> like
> >> 
> >> [    4.781268] xilinx_axienet 80200000.ethernet: autodetected 64-bit DMA range
> >> [   21.889563] xilinx_emac.mac xilinx_emac.mac.80200000 net4: renamed from eth0
> >> [   32.296965] xilinx_emac.mac xilinx_emac.mac.80200000 net4: PHY [axienet-80200000:05] driver [RTL8211F Gigabit Ethernet] (irq=70)
> >> [   32.313456] xilinx_emac.mac xilinx_emac.mac.80200000 net4: configuring for inband/sgmii link mode
> >> [   65.095419] xilinx_emac.mac xilinx_emac.mac.80200000 net4: Link is Up - 1Gbps/Full - flow control rx/tx
> >> 
> >> this is especially useful when compared to what might happen if there is
> >> an error before userspace has the chance to assign a name to the netdev:
> >> 
> >> [    4.947215] xilinx_emac.mac xilinx_emac.mac.1 (unnamed net_device) (uninitialized): incorrect link mode  for in-band status
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@linux.dev>
> >> ---
> >> 
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> - Add example log output to commit message
> > 
> > I rejected v1, why is this being sent again?
> 
> You asked for explanation, I provided it. I specifically pointed out why
> I wanted to do things this way. But I got no response. So here in v2.

Again, I said, "do not do that, this is not how ids work in the driver
model", and you tried to show lots of reasons why you wanted to do it
this way despite me saying so.

So again, no, sorry, this isn't ok.  Don't attempt to encode information
in a device id like you are trying to do here, that's not what a device
id is for at all.  I need to go dig up my old patch that made all device
ids random numbers just to see what foolish assumptions busses and
userspace tools are making....

thanks,

greg k-h