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]

Date:   Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:13:12 -0700
From:   Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <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 7/26/2020 12:16 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 05:30:05PM CEST, jacob.e.keller@...el.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org <netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org> On
>>> Visible in which sense? We don't show components anywhere if I'm not
>>> mistaken. They are currently very rarely used. Basically we just ported
>>> it from ethtool without much thinking.
>>>
>>
>> Component names are used in devlink info and displayed to end users along with versions, plus they're names passed by the user in devlink flash update. As far as documented, we shouldn't add new components without associated versions in the info report.
> 
> Okay. So it is loosely coupled. I think it would be nice to tight those
> 2 togeter so it is not up to the driver how he decides to implement it.
> 
I felt the coupling was quite clear from Jakub's recent documentation
improvements in the devlink-flash.rst doc file.

Are you thinking find some way to tie these two lists more closely in code?

Thanks,
Jake