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  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:   Sun, 2 Aug 2020 00:32:25 +0300
From:   Moshe Shemesh <>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <>
Cc:     Jacob Keller <>,
        Jiri Pirko <>,,,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Jiri Pirko <>,
        Vasundhara Volam <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 01/13] devlink: Add reload level option to
 devlink reload command

On 7/31/2020 2:11 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:30:45 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>>>>> My expectations would be that the driver must perform the lowest
>>>>> reset level possible that satisfies the requested functional change.
>>>>> IOW driver may do more, in fact it should be acceptable for the
>>>>> driver to always for a full HW reset (unless --live or other
>>>>> constraint is specified).
>>>> OK, but some combinations may still not be valid for specific driver
>>>> even if it tries lowest level possible.
>>> Can you give an example?
>> For example take the combination of fw-live-patch and param-init.
>> The fw-live-patch needs no re-initialization, while the param-init
>> requires driver re-initialization.
>> So the only way to do that is to the one command after the other, not
>> really combining.
> You need to read my responses more carefully. I don't have
> fw-live-patch in my proposal. The operation is fw-activate,
> --live is independent and an constraint, not an operation.

OK, I probably didn't get the whole picture right.

I am not sure I got it yet, please review if that's the uAPI that you 
mean to:

devlink dev reload [ net-ns-respawn { PID | NAME | ID } ] [ 
driver-param-init ] [ fw-activate [ --live] ]

Also, I recall that before devlink param was added the devlink reload 
was used for devlink resources.

I am not sure it is still used for devlink resources as I don't see it 
in the code of devlink reload.

But if it is we probably should add it as another operation.

Jiri, please comment on that.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists