netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net/mlx5e: Add DSFP EEPROM dump support to ethtool

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 12 Nov 2020 17:54:51 +0200
From:   Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>
CC:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Adrian Pop <pop.adrian61@...il.com>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net/mlx5e: Add DSFP EEPROM dump support to
 ethtool


On 11/12/2020 3:13 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 07:49:41AM +0200, Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> From: Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@...dia.com>
>>
>> DSFP is a new cable module type, which EEPROM uses memory layout
>> described in CMIS 4.0 document. Use corresponding standard value for
>> userspace ethtool to distinguish DSFP's layout from older standards.
>>
>> Add DSFP module ID in accordance to SFF-8024.
>>
>> DSFP module memory can be flat or paged, which is indicated by a
>> flat_mem bit. In first case, only page 00 is available, and in second -
>> multiple pages: 00h, 01h, 02h, 10h and 11h.
> You are simplifying quite a bit here, listing just these pages. When i
> see figure 8-1, CMIS Module Memory Map, i see many more pages, and
> banks of pages.


Right, but as I understand these are the basic 5 pages which are 
mandatory. Supporting more than that we will need new API.

> The current API is getting more and more strand to support SFP
> EEPROMs. We really do need to think of a new API, and it seems like
> now is a good time to do it, in order to support these devices.
>
>      Andrew