netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: phy: marvell10g: Support firmware loading on 88X3310

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]

Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 11:49:09 +0100
From: Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
To: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
 andrew@...n.ch, hkallweit1@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
 krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: phy: marvell10g: Support firmware
 loading on 88X3310

On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 11:15:41 +0100
Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com> wrote:

> On tis, dec 19, 2023 at 10:22, Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 21:14:39 +0100
> > Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> +MODULE_FIRMWARE("mrvl/x3310fw.hdr");  
> >
> > And do you have permission to publish this firmware into linux-firmware?  
> 
> No, I do not.
> 
> > Because when we tried this with Marvell, their lawyer guy said we can't
> > do that...  
> 
> I don't even have good enough access to ask the question, much less get
> rejected by Marvell :) I just used that path so that it would line up
> with linux-firmware if Marvell was to publish it in the future.

Yeah, it was pretty stupid in my opinion. The lawyer guy's reasoning
was that to download the firmware from Marvell's Customer Portal you
have to agree with Terms & Conditions, so it can't be distributed to
people who did not agree to Terms & Conditions. We told him that anyone
can get access to the firmware without agreeing anyway, since they can
just read the SPI NOR module connected to the PHY if we burn the
firmware in manufacture...

> Should MODULE_FIRMWARE be avoided for things that are not in
> linux-firmware?

I don't know.