netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 6/6] devlink: add overwrite mode to flash update

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: <20200721135356.GB2205@nanopsycho>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:53:56 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
Cc:     Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        Bin Luo <luobin9@...wei.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Danielle Ratson <danieller@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 6/6] devlink: add overwrite mode to flash
 update

Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 05:51:59PM CEST, kubakici@...pl wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 12:09:53 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> This looks odd. You have a single image yet you somehow divide it
>> into "program" and "config" areas. We already have infra in place to
>> take care of this. See DEVLINK_ATTR_FLASH_UPDATE_COMPONENT.
>> You should have 2 components:
>> 1) "program"
>> 2) "config"
>> 
>> Then it is up to the user what he decides to flash.
>
>99.9% of the time users want to flash "all". To achieve "don't flash
>config" with current infra users would have to flash each component 

Well you can have multiple component what would overlap:
1) "program" + "config" (default)
2) "program"
3) "config"



>one by one and then omit the one(s) which is config (guessing which 
>one that is based on the name).
>
>Wouldn't this be quite inconvenient?

I see it as an extra knob that is actually somehow provides degradation
of components.

>
>In case of MLX is PSID considered config?

Nope.