netdev - Re: PHY firmware update method

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]

Message-ID: <Y9BCrtlXXGO5WOKN@lunn.ch>
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2023 21:42:22 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Keller Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Subject: Re: PHY firmware update method

> So if you'd do this during the PHY probe, it might try to update the
> firmware on every boot and fail. Would that be acceptable?

Do you have a feeling how long that takes?

Also, is it possible to put the firmware into RAM and run it from
there, rather than put it into the EEPROM?

> How long could can a firmware update during probe run? Do we need
> to do it in the background with the PHY being offline. Sounds like
> not something we want.

One device being slow to probe will slow down the probe of that
bus. But probe of other busses should be unaffected. I _guess_ it
might have a global affect on EPROBE_DEFER, the next cycle could be
delayed?  Probably a question for GregKH, or reading the code.

If it going to be really slow, then i would suggest making use of
devlink and it being a user initiated operation.

	Andrew