netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/3] ethtool: Add link down reason callback

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:23:17 +0300
From:   Gal Pressman <galp@...lanox.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Vidya Sagar Ravipati <vidya@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        David Decotigny <decot@...glers.com>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/3] ethtool: Add link down reason callback

>> The I2C bus that's connected to this module (interface).
>> We can add another reason for MDIO BUS errors or merge to one BUS error reason.
>>>> +	ETHTOOL_LINK_UNSUPP_EEPROM, /* Unsupported EEPROM */
>>> Which EEPROM?
>> Module EEPROM.
> Which module? This is all very vague. Some of the Marvell 10G PHYs
> have an EEPROM to boot from, for example. Would that count? Or are you
> talking about the SFP 'EEPROM', which is not actually an EEPROM, in
> that it is not Electrically Erasable, not is it a ROM, since things
> like temperature changes with time.

I am referring to the optical/electrical module EEPROM which is exposed through standard
interface such as SFF 8472. Might not be an actual EEPROM but that's how the SFF committee decided
to refer to it :).

>
>>>> +	ETHTOOL_LINK_OVERTEMP, /* Over temperature */
>>>> +	ETHTOOL_LINK_PWR_BUDGET_EXC, /* Power budget exceeded */
>>>> +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODULE_ADMIN_DOWN, /* Module admin down */
>>> It seems like these last 6 are all SFP issues? How about putting SFP
>>> into the name?
>> Might be a QSFP issue for example, we can put module in the name though.
> What is the generic name of SFP, SFP+ QSFP, SFF?

AFAIK, the name is module.
>
>      Andrew