netdev - Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 00/11] net: qed/qede: critical hw error handling

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: <2a29996c-21a6-7566-c27e-7b8fb280e18c@marvell.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 May 2020 22:40:12 +0300
From:   Igor Russkikh <irusskikh@...vell.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "Ariel Elior" <aelior@...vell.com>,
        Michal Kalderon <mkalderon@...vell.com>,
        "Denis Bolotin" <dbolotin@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 00/11] net: qed/qede: critical hw
 error handling

> I'm not 100% happy that the debug data gets reported to the management
> FW before the devlink health code is in place. For the Linux community,
> I think, having standard Linux interfaces implemented first is the
> priority.

Hi Jakub,

Thanks for the comment. I feel these two are a bit separate. We try to push
important messages to MFW, not debug data. And all these messages are as well
perfectly being reported on device level error printouts, they are not kind of
lost.

And for devlink, we anyway will need all the above infrastructure, to
eventually implement devlink dumps and other features.

Or, may be I didn't get your point?

Thanks,
  Igor