[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3d8b9b2b-25e2-3812-2daf-09f1c5088eb0@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 16:25:33 +0200
From: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Adrian Pop <pop.adrian61@...il.com>,
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
"Don Bollinger" <don@...bollingers.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Vladyslav Tarasiuk" <vladyslavt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V3 net-next 1/5] ethtool: Allow network drivers to
dump arbitrary EEPROM data
On 3/18/2021 3:03 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 07:12:39PM +0200, Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> From: Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@...dia.com>
>>
>> Define get_module_eeprom_data_by_page() ethtool callback and implement
>> netlink infrastructure.
>>
>> get_module_eeprom_data_by_page() allows network drivers to dump a part
>> of module's EEPROM specified by page and bank numbers along with offset
>> and length. It is effectively a netlink replacement for
>> get_module_info() and get_module_eeprom() pair, which is needed due to
>> emergence of complex non-linear EEPROM layouts.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/networking/ethtool-netlink.rst | 34 ++++-
>> include/linux/ethtool.h | 8 +-
>> include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h | 25 +++
>> include/uapi/linux/ethtool_netlink.h | 19 +++
>> net/ethtool/Makefile | 2 +-
>> net/ethtool/eeprom.c | 153 +++++++++++++++++++
>> net/ethtool/netlink.c | 10 ++
>> net/ethtool/netlink.h | 2 +
>> 8 files changed, 249 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 net/ethtool/eeprom.c
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/networking/ethtool-netlink.rst b/Documentation/networking/ethtool-netlink.rst
>> index 05073482db05..25846b97632a 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/networking/ethtool-netlink.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/networking/ethtool-netlink.rst
>> @@ -1280,6 +1280,36 @@ Kernel response contents:
>> For UDP tunnel table empty ``ETHTOOL_A_TUNNEL_UDP_TABLE_TYPES`` indicates that
>> the table contains static entries, hard-coded by the NIC.
>>
>> +EEPROM_DATA
>> +===========
>> +
>> +Fetch module EEPROM data dump.
>> +
>> +Request contents:
>> +
>> + ===================================== ====== ==========================
>> + ``ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_HEADER`` nested request header
>> + ``ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_OFFSET`` u32 offset within a page
>> + ``ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_LENGTH`` u32 amount of bytes to read
> I wonder if offset and length should be u8. At most, we should only be
> returning a 1/2 page, so 128 bytes. We don't need a u32.
That's right when page is given, but user may have commands that used to
work on the ioctl KAPI with offset higher than one page.
>> Request translation
>> ===================
>>
>> @@ -1357,8 +1387,8 @@ are netlink only.
>> ``ETHTOOL_GET_DUMP_FLAG`` n/a
>> ``ETHTOOL_GET_DUMP_DATA`` n/a
>> ``ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO`` ``ETHTOOL_MSG_TSINFO_GET``
>> - ``ETHTOOL_GMODULEINFO`` n/a
>> - ``ETHTOOL_GMODULEEEPROM`` n/a
>> + ``ETHTOOL_GMODULEINFO`` ``ETHTOOL_MSG_MODULE_EEPROM_GET``
>> + ``ETHTOOL_GMODULEEEPROM`` ``ETHTOOL_MSG_MODULE_EEPROM_GET``
>> ``ETHTOOL_GEEE`` ``ETHTOOL_MSG_EEE_GET``
>> ``ETHTOOL_SEEE`` ``ETHTOOL_MSG_EEE_SET``
>> ``ETHTOOL_GRSSH`` n/a
> We should check with Michal about this. It is not a direct replacement
> of the old IOCTL API, it is new API. He may want it documented
> differently.
Michal, please comment on where it should be.
>> +static int eeprom_data_parse_request(struct ethnl_req_info *req_info, struct nlattr **tb,
>> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
>> +{
>> + struct eeprom_data_req_info *request = EEPROM_DATA_REQINFO(req_info);
>> + struct net_device *dev = req_info->dev;
>> +
>> + if (!tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_OFFSET] ||
>> + !tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_LENGTH] ||
>> + !tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_I2C_ADDRESS])
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + request->i2c_address = nla_get_u8(tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_I2C_ADDRESS]);
>> + if (request->i2c_address > ETH_MODULE_MAX_I2C_ADDRESS)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + request->offset = nla_get_u32(tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_OFFSET]);
>> + request->length = nla_get_u32(tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_LENGTH]);
>> + if (tb[ETHTOOL_A_EEPROM_DATA_PAGE] &&
>> + dev->ethtool_ops->get_module_eeprom_data_by_page &&
>> + request->offset + request->length > ETH_MODULE_EEPROM_PAGE_LEN)
>> + return -EINVAL;
> You need to watch out for overflows here. 0xfffffff0 + 0x20 is less
> than ETH_MODULE_EEPROM_PAGE_LEN when it wraps around, but will cause
> bad things to happen.
Ack.
> Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists