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: <8c7a5ea2-fcc5-6f05-d9dc-abbf0ceddf6d@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jul 2020 10:28:08 -0700
From:   Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>, 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



On 7/21/2020 6:56 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 08:52:58PM CEST, jacob.e.keller@...el.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/20/2020 8:51 AM, Jakub Kicinski 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"
>>>>
>>
>> First off, unfortunately at least for ice, the "main" section of NVM
>> contains both the management firmware as well as config settings. I
>> don't really have a way to split it up.
> 
> You don't have to split it up. Just for component "x" you push binary
> "A" and flash part of it and for comonent "y" you push the same binary
> "A" and flash different part of it.
> 
> Consider the component as a "mask" in your case.
> 
> 

The driver itself doesn't really know what parts of the image are which.
I have to ask the firmware. And it doesn't have a "settings only" flag.
I have roughly equivalent to "binary only", "binary + settings" and
"binary + settings + vital fields"

Plus, this means that every update must be single-component and there's
no way to distinguish this when an update is supposed to be for all of
the components in the PLDM file.