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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2022 14:53:42 -0800 From: "Jonathan Lemon" <jonathan.lemon@...il.com> To: "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, richardcochran@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, kernel-team@...com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] ptp: ocp: add nvmem interface for accessing eeprom On 4 Mar 2022, at 19:11, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 04 Mar 2022 08:50:02 -0800 Jonathan Lemon wrote: >>> And AFAIU the company delivering the card writes / assembles the >>> firmware, you can't take FW load from company A and flash it onto >>> company B's card, no? >> >> Nope. There are currently 3 designs, and 3 firmware variants. >> I’m looking for a way to tell them apart, especially since the >> firmware file must match the card. Suggestions? >> >> [root@...ecard net-next]# devlink dev info >> pci/0000:02:00.0: >> driver ptp_ocp >> serial_number fc:c2:3d:2e:d7:c0 >> versions: >> fixed: >> board.manufacture GOTHAM >> board.id RSH04940 >> running: >> fw 21 >> pci/0000:65:00.0: >> driver ptp_ocp >> serial_number 4e:75:6d:00:00:00 >> versions: >> fixed: >> board.manufacture O2S >> board.id R3006G000100 >> running: >> fw 9 >> pci/0000:b3:00.0: >> driver ptp_ocp >> serial_number 3d:00:00:0e:37:73 >> versions: >> fixed: >> board.manufacture CLS >> board.id R4006G000101 >> running: >> fw 32773 > > Thanks for the output! > > In my limited experience the right fit here would be PCI Subsystem > Vendor ID. This will also allow lspci to pretty print the vendor > name like: > > 30:00.0 Dunno controller: OCP Time Card whatever (Vendor X) Unfortunately, that’s not going to work for a while, until the relevant numbers get through the PCI approval body. I believe that board.manufacture is correct. In this particular example, the 3 boards are fabbed in 3 different locations, but there are 2 “vendors”. So what this does is identify the contractor who assembled the particular board. Isn’t that what this is intended for? — Jonathan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists