linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ixgbe: Add support for firmware update

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:36:08 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Richard chien <m8809301@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Richard chien <richard.chien@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ixgbe: Add support for firmware update

On Sun, Jun 09, 2024 at 04:57:35PM +0800, Richard chien wrote:
> This patch adds support for firmware update to the in-tree ixgbe driver and it is actually a port
> from the out-of-tree ixgbe driver. In-band firmware update is one of the essential system maintenance
> tasks. To simplify this task, the Intel online firmware update utility provides a common interface
> that works across different Intel NICs running the igb/ixgbe/i40e drivers. Unfortunately, the in-tree
> igb and ixgbe drivers are unable to support this firmware update utility, causing problems for
> enterprise users who do not or cannot use out-of-distro drivers due to security and various other
> reasons (e.g. commercial Linux distros do not provide technical support for out-of-distro drivers).
> As a result, getting this feature into the in-tree ixgbe driver is highly desirable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Richard chien <richard.chien@....com>

How about you work on one driver at a time, to learn about the
processes for submitting to the Linux kernel.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html#netdev-faq

https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html

I would also think about why Intel has not submitted this code before?
Maybe because it does things the wrong way? Please look at how other
Ethernet drivers support firmware. Is it the same? It might be you
need to throw away this code and reimplement it to mainline standards,
maybe using devlink flash, or ethtool -f.

One additional question. Is the firmware part of linux-firmware? Given
this is Intel, i expect the firmware is distributeable, but have they
distributed it?

	Andrew