netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] net: e1000e: add MAC address kernel cmd line parameter

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: <20190228192958.GA24085@lunn.ch>
Date:   Thu, 28 Feb 2019 20:29:58 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Flavio Suligoi <f.suligoi@...m.it>
Cc:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net: e1000e: add MAC address kernel cmd line parameter

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 05:13:27PM +0000, Flavio Suligoi wrote:
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > we produce a lot of boards and we have to change the MAC address,
> > > from u-boot, for every board.  So I must save in the u-boot
> > > environment (SPI NOR flash) the MAC address for every board.
> > 
> > Hi Flavio
> > 
> > u-boot should be able to write the MAC address in the correct part of
> > device tree. Boards have been doing this a long time.
> > 
> > Module parameters are considered bad. You should only do it if you
> > have no other option. Here you do have another options, so it is going
> > to be a hard sell getting David to access your patch.
> > 
> > You will have more success by adding a call to
> > eth_platform_get_mac_address() to the e1000e driver.
> 
> You have right, and thanks for your suggestions, 
> but with a kernel parameter I can use the same method
> for any board where the NVM is missed, independently of any architecture
> (with or without the device tree presence - ARM or x86 or others).

Hi Flavio

Well, lets wait for David to say what he thinks about the module
parameter.

	Andrew