netdev - RE: [patch net-next 4/4] net: devlink: expose default flash update target

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CO1PR11MB5089CDBD5B989C45FDA80B77D6719@CO1PR11MB5089.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 17:09:35 +0000
From:   "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
CC:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "idosch@...dia.com" <idosch@...dia.com>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "saeedm@...dia.com" <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        "vikas.gupta@...adcom.com" <vikas.gupta@...adcom.com>,
        "gospo@...adcom.com" <gospo@...adcom.com>
Subject: RE: [patch net-next 4/4] net: devlink: expose default flash update
 target



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 10:47 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> davem@...emloft.net; idosch@...dia.com; pabeni@...hat.com;
> edumazet@...gle.com; saeedm@...dia.com; vikas.gupta@...adcom.com;
> gospo@...adcom.com
> Subject: Re: [patch net-next 4/4] net: devlink: expose default flash update target
> 
> Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 12:07:41AM CEST, jacob.e.keller@...el.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> >> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 2:46 PM
> >> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> davem@...emloft.net;
> >> idosch@...dia.com; pabeni@...hat.com; edumazet@...gle.com;
> >> saeedm@...dia.com; vikas.gupta@...adcom.com; gospo@...adcom.com
> >> Subject: Re: [patch net-next 4/4] net: devlink: expose default flash update
> target
> >>
> >> On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 20:59:28 +0000 Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> >> > > My intuition would be that if you specify no component you're flashing
> >> > > the entire device. Is that insufficient? Can you explain the use case?
> >> > >
> >> > > Also Documentation/ needs to be updated.
> >> >
> >> > Some of the components in ice include the DDP which has an info
> >> > version, but which is not part of the flash but is loaded by the
> >> > driver during initialization.
> >>
> >> Right "entire device" as in "everything in 'stored'". Runtime loaded
> >> stuff should not be listed in "stored" and therefore not be considered
> >> "flashable". Correct?
> >
> >Yes I believe we don't list those as stored.
> >
> >We do have some extra version information that is reported through multiple
> info lines, i.e. we report:
> >
> >fw.mgmt
> >fw.mgmt.api
> >fw.mgmt.build
> >
> >where the .api and .build are sub-version fields of the fw.mgmt and can
> potentially give further information but are just a part of the fw.mgmt
> component. They can't be flashed separately.
> 
> Yep, in my patchset, this is accounted for. The driver can say if the
> "version" is flashable (passed as a compenent name) or not. In this case,
> it is not and it only tells the user version of some fw part.
> 

I think we can just go with "is this flashable or not?" and then document that if no component is flashed, the driver should be flashing all marked components?

Then we don't need a "default" since the default without component is to flash everything.

> >
> >Thanks,
> >Jake