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:   Tue, 15 Sep 2020 08:18:44 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>,
        Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v4 01/15] devlink: Add reload action option
 to devlink reload command

Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:06:19AM CEST, michael.chan@...adcom.com wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 2:31 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 13:28:29 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > >> Instead, why don't you block in reload_up() until the reset is complete?
>> > >
>> > >Though user initiate "devlink dev reload" event on a single interface,
>> > >all driver entities undergo reset and all entities recover
>> > >independently. I don't think we can block the reload_up() on the
>> > >interface(that user initiated the command), until whole reset is
>> > >complete.
>> >
>> > Why not? mlxsw reset takes up to like 10 seconds for example.
>>
>> +1, why?
>
>Yes, we should be able to block until the reset sequence is complete.
>I don't see any problem.  I will work with Vasundhara on this.

Could you please also remove fw_reset as it is apparently misuse of
devlink health mechanism?

Thanks!

Powered by blists - more mailing lists