linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v4 01/15] devlink: Add reload action option to devlink reload command

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:   Mon, 14 Sep 2020 15:06:19 -0700
From:   Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>,
        Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v4 01/15] devlink: Add reload action option
 to devlink reload command

On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 2:31 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 13:28:29 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > >> Instead, why don't you block in reload_up() until the reset is complete?
> > >
> > >Though user initiate "devlink dev reload" event on a single interface,
> > >all driver entities undergo reset and all entities recover
> > >independently. I don't think we can block the reload_up() on the
> > >interface(that user initiated the command), until whole reset is
> > >complete.
> >
> > Why not? mlxsw reset takes up to like 10 seconds for example.
>
> +1, why?

Yes, we should be able to block until the reset sequence is complete.
I don't see any problem.  I will work with Vasundhara on this.