netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/3] net/mlx5e: Expose link down reason to ethtool

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: <311af079-cf95-b487-f59a-9566e17296bf@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:33:39 +0300
From:   Gal Pressman <galp.dev@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>, Gal Pressman <galp@...lanox.com>
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 3/3] net/mlx5e: Expose link down reason to
 ethtool


> Is my reading correct that in case the reason is not in the
> pddr2ethtool_table opaque binary data will be passed from the firmware
> to user space?  Is there any particular reason to allow for this?  If
> it's just for the rare scenario where a new error code needs to be
> added perhaps it would be enough to dump the FW-provided message to the
> logs?

No binary data is passed in this patch, the monitor_opcode is simply a vendor specific
16 bit id that is used when the reason  is not generic enough to have it's own enum.