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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 22:33:15 +0000 From: "Nikunj Kela (nkela)" <nkela@...co.com> To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, "jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> CC: "xe-linux-external(mailer list)" <xe-linux-external@...co.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] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation On 5/16/19, 3:02 PM, "Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote: On 5/16/19 12:55 PM, Nikunj Kela (nkela) wrote: >> >> >> On 5/16/19, 12:35 PM, "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +0000, Nikunj Kela wrote: >> >> Some of the broken NICs don't have EEPROM programmed correctly. It >> >> results >> >> in probe to fail. This change adds a module parameter that can be >> >> used to >> >> ignore nvm checksum validation. >> >> >> >> Cc: xe-linux-external@...co.com >> >> Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela <nkela@...co.com> >> >> --- >> >> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 28 >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++------ >> >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> >NAK for two reasons. First, module parameters are not desirable >> >because their individual to one driver and a global solution should be >> >found so that all networking device drivers can use the solution. This >> >will keep the interface to change/setup/modify networking drivers >> >consistent for all drivers. >> >> >> >Second and more importantly, if your NIC is broken, fix it. Do not try >> >and create a software workaround so that you can continue to use a >> >broken NIC. There are methods/tools available to properly reprogram >> >the EEPROM on a NIC, which is the right solution for your issue. >> >> I am proposing this as a debug parameter. Obviously, we need to fix EEPROM but this helps us continuing the development while manufacturing fixes NIC. >Then why even bother with sending this upstream? >-- >Florian My colleagues wanted me to upstream so if there is anyone else in the same situations, maybe there is a better solution.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists