netdev - Re: [patch net-next 0/9] mlxsw: Support firmware flash

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: <fba5a440-ba1e-84bd-d2d2-d011406d3a4a@mellanox.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 May 2017 18:14:15 +0300
From:   Yotam Gigi <yotamg@...lanox.com>
To:     "Mintz, Yuval" <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "idosch@...lanox.com" <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        "mlxsw@...lanox.com" <mlxsw@...lanox.com>,
        Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 0/9] mlxsw: Support firmware flash

On 05/23/2017 06:04 PM, Mintz, Yuval wrote:
>>>> Patches 6-8 add the "ethtool -f" and the boot-time firmware upgrade on
>> the
>>>> mlxsw spectrum driver.
>>> When we tried using `ethtool -E' for qed we got burned for trying to use
>> the magic
>>> value [1]. When we suggested extending it to allow some private data
>> indications,
>>> Ben claimed that this entire ethtool infrastructure is a thing of the past,
>>> and we should try using MTD instead - a claim no one bothered to counter.
>>>
>>> Creating proprietary file-formats, filling them with metadata and
>>> complementary driver state-machines could easily overcome the original
>>> obstacle we faced. But it raises the question of whether these APIs are
>>> valid or obsolete.
>> The metadata in our format is needed to allow us to hold several firmware
>> images for several spectrum silicon variants in one file, hence the metadata
>> is used by the driver and does not get transferred to the device.
> Understood; Otherwise it would have been 'data' and not 'metadata'.
>
>> Our code can only be used to transfer firmware to the device, and cannot
>> be used to configure the device.
> Not sure what this refers to? The differences between '-f' and '-E'?
> Also, assuming you haven't started selling your adapters as persistent memory
> for storage, what's the difference?
>

Sorry, I am not sure I understand. You think that drivers should not implement
ethtool's flash_device callback anymore? do you have an alternative for firmware
flash?