[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181106121913.036b8c4d@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:19:13 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
Shalom Toledo <shalomt@...lanox.com>,
Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>,
"dsahern@...il.com" <dsahern@...il.com>,
"andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
mlxsw <mlxsw@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] devlink: Add fw_version_check generic
parameter
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 20:05:00 +0000, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> From: Shalom Toledo <shalomt@...lanox.com>
>
> Many drivers checking the device's firmware version during the
> initialization flow and flashing a compatible version if the current
> version is not.
>
> fw_version_check gives the ability to skip this check which allows to run
> the device with a different firmware version than required by the driver
> for testing and/or debugging purposes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shalom Toledo <shalomt@...lanox.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
The documentation is missing, so it's hard to comment on the definition
of the parameter... We have a FW loading policy for NFP, too, so it'd
be good to see if we can find a common ground.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists