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]

Date:   Thu, 14 May 2020 13:02:41 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Igor Russkikh <irusskikh@...vell.com>
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

On Thu, 14 May 2020 22:40:12 +0300 Igor Russkikh wrote:
> > 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?

That's fine, I'm just saying - I hope the devlink part doesn't take too
long to implement :)