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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 11:17:27 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com> Cc: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>, Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 01/13] devlink: Add reload level option to devlink reload command On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 10:09:20 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote: > >> But I am still missing something: fw-activate implies that it will > >> activate a new FW image stored on flash, pending activation. What if the > >> user wants to reset and reload the FW if no new FW pending ? Should we > >> add --force option to fw-activate level ? > > > > Since reload does not check today if anything changed - i.e. if reload > > is actually needed, neither should fw-activate, IMO. I'd expect the > > "--force behavior" to be the default. > > > > Yep. What about if there is HW/FW that can't initiate the fw-activate > reset unless there is a pending update? I think ice firmware might > respond to the "please reset/activate" command with a specific status > code indicating that no update was pending. > > I think the simplest solution is to just interpret this as a success. > Alternatively we could report a specific error to inform user that no > activation took place? I'd do EOPNOTSUPP + extack.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists