netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: ethtool: add support for forward error correction modes

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: <20170706162749.4f51f36d@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:27:49 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Casey Leedom <leedom@...lsio.com>,
        Dustin Byford <dustin@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "linville@...driver.com" <linville@...driver.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "vidya.chowdary@...il.com" <vidya.chowdary@...il.com>,
        "olson@...ulusnetworks.com" <olson@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Manoj Malviya <manojmalviya@...lsio.com>,
        Santosh Rastapur <santosh@...lsio.com>,
        "yuval.mintz@...gic.com" <yuval.mintz@...gic.com>,
        "odedw@...lanox.com" <odedw@...lanox.com>,
        "ariela@...lanox.com" <ariela@...lanox.com>,
        "galp@...lanox.com" <galp@...lanox.com>,
        "jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: ethtool: add support for forward
 error correction modes

On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 01:15:50 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Even this feels too extreme for me.  I think users would hate it.  They
> > did an ifup and swapped cables.  They expect the OS/Driver/Firmware
> > to continue trying to honor their ifup request.  
> 
> Lets take a look around at other subsystems....
> 
> What happens if you hot-unplug a SATA drive?
> An MMC card?
> A USB device?
> A PCIe card?
> A CPU?
> An SDRAM?
> 
> Do you know of any subsystem that tried to keep its configuration
> across a hot unplug/plug event? I suspect they all require user space
> to take some action to get the newly plugged hardware into operation.

That was exactly my thinking initially, but I'm not so sure anymore
because the layer to which configuration is applied does not reside on
the portion of HW which is hot swapped.  I'm very far from an expert on
the PHY layer stuff but modules start at the PMA layer?

If only IEEE defined for us what the behaviour should be :)