[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pci-arbiter: Rename command line options

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pci-arbiter: Rename command line options
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 16:14:51 -0800
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)


Joan Lledó via Bug reports for the GNU Hurd, le dim. 16 févr. 2020 13:23:35 
+0100, a ecrit:
> El 15/2/20 a les 15:02, Samuel Thibault ha escrit:
> > Why a capital b? It's be more coherent to have -d -b -s -f all
> > small-caps.
> > 
> Because of this notice in --help:
> "More than one permission scope may be specified. Uppercase options
> create a new permission scope if the current one already has a value for
> that option. If one node is covered by more than one permission scope,
> only the first permission is applied to that node."

Ok. The text is really not easy to understand, but with your examples
I understand what you meant.  This seems to me quite difficult for
users to understand, and to me it unnecessarily conflates the two
unrelated notions of PCI specification and scope.  I would say it would
be much simpler to make the -U and -G options create new scopes, and let
-d/-b/-s/-f be lowercase. I.e. we'd have sets of -d/-b/-s/-f options
separated by sets of -U/-G options, so instead of :

> -B 0 -s 5 -f 0 -B 0 -U 1000

we'd have:
-b 0 -s 5 -f 0 -U 1000 -b 0

> This will create two permission scopes:
> 1.- 00:05.0 belongs to nobody (Error)
> 2.- 00:*.* belongs to 1000 (OK)

And this confusing example:

> -B 0 -s 5 -f 0 -s 4 -U 1000

would be

-U 1000 -B 0 -s 5 -f 0 -s 4

which is more obviously bogus: -s is set twice in the same uid=1000 scope.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]