On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 09:51:30AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 06:10:27PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 02:33:44PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 11:47:37AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 04:33:00PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 06:22:52PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 07:04:50PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 10:05:33AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Virtual Product Data (VPD) attribute is not > > > > > > > > readable by regular user without root permissions. > > > > > > > > Such restriction is not really needed, as data > > > > > > > > presented in that VPD is not sensitive at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This change aligns the permissions of the VPD > > > > > > > > attribute to be accessible for read by all users, > > > > > > > > while write being restricted to root only. > ... > > What's the use case? How does an unprivileged user use the VPD > > information? > > We have to add new field keyword=value in VA section of VPD, which > will indicate very specific sub-model for devices used as a bridge. > > > I can certainly imagine using VPD for bug reporting, but that > > would typically involve dmesg, dmidecode, lspci -vv, etc, all of > > which already require privilege, so it's not clear to me how > > public VPD info would help in that scenario. > > I'm targeting other scenario - monitoring tool, which doesn't need > root permissions for reading data. It needs to distinguish between > NIC sub-models. Maybe the driver could expose something in sysfs? Maybe the driver needs to know the sub-model as well, and reading VPD once in the driver would make subsequent userspace sysfs reads trivial and fast. Bjorn
