netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] cxgb4: Add support to flash firmware config image

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200804094321.GA32270@chelsio.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:13:26 +0530
From:   Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@...lsio.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ganji Aravind <ganji.aravind@...lsio.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, vishal@...lsio.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] cxgb4: Add support to flash firmware config
 image

On Monday, August 08/03/20, 2020 at 14:13:04 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 22:42:28 +0530 Rahul Lakkireddy wrote:
> > The config file contains very low-level firmware and device specific
> > params and most of them are dependent on the type of Chelsio NIC.
> > The params are mostly device dependent register-value pairs.
> > We don't see users messing around with the params on their own
> > without consultation. The users only need some mechanism to flash
> > the custom config file shared by us on to their adapter. After
> > device restart, the firmware will automatically pick up the flashed
> > config file and redistribute the resources, as per their requested
> > use-case.
> > 
> > We're already foreseeing very long awkward list (more than 50 params)
> > for mapping the config file to devlink-dev params and are hoping this
> > is fine. Here's a sample on how it would look.
> > 
> > hw_sge_reg_1008=0x40800
> > hw_sge_reg_100c=0x22222222
> > hw_sge_reg_10a0=0x01040810
> > hw_tp_reg_7d04=0x00010000
> > hw_tp_reg_7dc0=0x0e2f8849
> > 
> > and so on.
> 
> I have no details on what you're actually storing in the config, 
> and I don't care what your format is.
> 
> If it's a configuration parameter - it needs a proper API.
> 
> If it's a low level board param or such - it doesn't need a separate
> flashable partition and can come with the rest of FW.
> 
> I know the firmware flashing interface is a lovely, binary, opaque
> interface which vendors love. We'll not entertain this kind of abuse.
> 
> Nacked-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>

Sure, will drop the patch for now and revisit again, as part of
devlink or better API.

Thanks,
Rahul