netdev - Re: devlink interface for asynchronous event/messages 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200521223244.GA1104013@splinter>
Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 01:32:44 +0300
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        petrm@...lanox.com, amitc@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: devlink interface for asynchronous event/messages from firmware?

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 03:09:57PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/21/2020 2:51 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 May 2020 13:59:32 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> >>>> So the ice firmware can optionally send diagnostic debug messages via
> >>>> its control queue. The current solutions we've used internally
> >>>> essentially hex-dump the binary contents to the kernel log, and then
> >>>> these get scraped and converted into a useful format for human consumption.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not 100% of the format, but I know it's based on a decoding file
> >>>> that is specific to a given firmware image, and thus attempting to tie
> >>>> this into the driver is problematic.  
> >>>
> >>> You explained how it works, but not why it's needed :)  
> >>
> >> Well, the reason we want it is to be able to read the debug/diagnostics
> >> data in order to debug issues that might be related to firmware or
> >> software mis-use of firmware interfaces.
> >>
> >> By having it be a separate interface rather than trying to scrape from
> >> the kernel message buffer, it becomes something we can have as a
> >> possibility for debugging in the field.
> > 
> > For pure debug/tracing perhaps trace_devlink_hwerr() is the right fit?
> > 
> > Right Ido?
> > 
> 
> Hm, yes that might be more suitable for this purpose. I'll take a look
> at it!

Jacob, here is more context that might help:

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20191103083554.6317-1-idosch@idosch.org/
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20191112064830.27002-1-idosch@idosch.org/

> 
> Thanks,
> Jake