netdev - Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] qed: FW 8.42.2.0 debug features

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: <20200122182213.GJ7018@unreal>
Date:   Wed, 22 Jan 2020 20:22:13 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Kalderon <mkalderon@...vell.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Ariel Elior <aelior@...vell.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] qed: FW 8.42.2.0 debug features

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:41:10PM +0000, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 6:15 PM
> >
> > External Email
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:03:04PM +0000, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > > > From: linux-rdma-owner@...r.kernel.org <linux-rdma-
> > > > owner@...r.kernel.org> On Behalf Of Jakub Kicinski
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:26:26 +0200, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > > > > Add to debug dump more information on the platform it was
> > > > > collected from (kernel version, epoch, pci func, path id).
> > > >
> > > > Kernel version and epoch don't belong in _device_ debug dump.
> > > This is actually very useful when customers provide us with a debug-dump
> > using the ethtool-d option.
> > > We can immediately verify the linux kernel version used.
> >
> > Why can't they give you "uname -a" output?
> Unfortunately, history has shown us that in many cases even though requested uname -a is not
> Provided, or worse, provided but does not match the actual kernel run on.
> Having this information in the dump helps us and provides us with more confidence than uname -a output.

I don't buy it, if user can't provide adequate "uname -a", you can't
trust his "ethtool -d" dump file too.

Thanks

>
> >
> > Thanks