netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] mlxsw: Query number of modules from firmware

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 06 Oct 2019 18:32:29 +0200 (CEST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     idosch@...sch.org
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...lanox.com, vadimp@...lanox.com,
        mlxsw@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] mlxsw: Query number of modules from
 firmware

From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Date: Sun,  6 Oct 2019 09:34:47 +0300

> From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> 
> Vadim says:
> 
> The patchset adds support for a new field "num_of_modules" of Management
> General Peripheral Information Register (MGPIR), providing the maximum
> number of QSFP modules, which can be supported by the system.
> 
> It allows to obtain the number of QSFP modules directly from this field,
> as a static data, instead of old method of getting this info through
> "network port to QSFP module" mapping. With the old method, in case of
> port dynamic re-configuration some modules can logically "disappear" as
> a result of port split operations, which can cause some modules to
> appear missing.
> 
> Such scenario can happen on a system equipped with a BMC card, while PCI
> chip driver at host CPU side can perform some ports "split" or "unsplit"
> operations, while BMC side I2C chip driver reads the "port-to-module"
> mapping.
> 
> Add common API for FW "minor" and "subminor" versions validation and
> share it between PCI and I2C based drivers.
> 
> Add FW version validation for "minimal" driver, because use of new field
> "num_of_modules" in MGPIR register is not backward compatible.

Looks good, series applied.