linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: marvell: prestera: add firmware v4.0 support

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]

Message-ID: <YW6+r9u2a9k6wKF+@lunn.ch>
Date:   Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:48:47 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Volodymyr Mytnyk <volodymyr.mytnyk@...ision.eu>
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, mickeyr@...vell.com, serhiy.pshyk@...ision.eu,
        taras.chornyi@...ision.eu, Volodymyr Mytnyk <vmytnyk@...vell.com>,
        Vadym Kochan <vkochan@...vell.com>,
        Yevhen Orlov <yevhen.orlov@...ision.eu>,
        Taras Chornyi <tchornyi@...vell.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: marvell: prestera: add firmware v4.0
 support

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 09:03:43AM +0300, Volodymyr Mytnyk wrote:
> From: Volodymyr Mytnyk <vmytnyk@...vell.com>
> 
> Add firmware (FW) version 4.0 support for Marvell Prestera
> driver. This FW ABI will be compatible with future Prestera
> driver versions and features.
> 
> The previous FW support is dropped due to significant changes
> in FW ABI, thus this version of Prestera driver will not be
> compatible with previous FW versions.

So we are back to breaking any switch already deployed using the
driver with the older firmware. Bricks in broom closets, needing
physical access to fix them. Was nothing learnt from the upgrade from
v2 to v3 with its ABI breakage and keeping backwards support for one
version? Do you see other vendors making ABI breaking changes to there
firmware?

Why would anybody decide to use Marvell, when you can use Microchip
devices an avoid all these problems?

	Andrew