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  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:   Wed, 9 Sep 2020 12:22:33 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Shannon Nelson <snelson@...sando.io>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] ionic: add devlink firmware update

On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 10:58:19 -0700 Shannon Nelson wrote:
> On 9/9/20 9:44 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 09:23:08 -0700 Shannon Nelson wrote:  
> >> On 9/8/20 4:54 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:  
> >>> On Tue,  8 Sep 2020 15:48:12 -0700 Shannon Nelson wrote:  
> >>>> +	dl = priv_to_devlink(ionic);
> >>>> +	devlink_flash_update_status_notify(dl, label, NULL, 1, timeout);
> >>>> +	start_time = jiffies;
> >>>> +	end_time = start_time + (timeout * HZ);
> >>>> +	do {
> >>>> +		mutex_lock(&ionic->dev_cmd_lock);
> >>>> +		ionic_dev_cmd_go(&ionic->idev, &cmd);
> >>>> +		err = ionic_dev_cmd_wait(ionic, DEVCMD_TIMEOUT);
> >>>> +		mutex_unlock(&ionic->dev_cmd_lock);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +		devlink_flash_update_status_notify(dl, label, NULL,
> >>>> +						   (jiffies - start_time) / HZ,
> >>>> +						   timeout);  
> >>> That's not what I meant. I think we can plumb proper timeout parameter
> >>> through devlink all the way to user space.  
> >> Sure, but until that gets worked out, this should suffice.  
> > I don't understand - what will get worked out?  
> 
> I'm suggesting that this implementation using the existing devlink 
> logging services should suffice until someone can design, implement, and 
> get accepted a different bit of plumbing.  Unfortunately, that's not a 
> job that I can get to right now.

This hack is too nasty to be accepted.

So to be clear your options are:
 - plumb the single extra netlink parameter through to devlink
 - wait for someone else to do that for you, before you get firmware
   flashing accepted upstream.

Your "NIC" is quite "special", so you gotta be willing to lay the
groundwork it you want it to be supported upstream.

I already regret acking your weird live reset without proper APIs.
Now Mellanox is doing the plumbing for the exact same feature.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists