netdev - RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v3] ixgbe: add support for thermal sensor event reception

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <DS0PR11MB778541E49C5BCF95AF41D27CF0FF2@DS0PR11MB7785.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 07:44:51 +0000
From: "Jagielski, Jedrzej" <jedrzej.jagielski@...el.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>, "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, "Nguyen, Anthony L"
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, "Kitszel,
 Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, "Polchlopek, Mateusz"
	<mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v3] ixgbe: add support for
 thermal sensor event reception

From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> 
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2025 3:17 PM

>> Actually there is only one adapter across all portfolio of ixgbe adapters
>> which supports this feature. That is 82599, none other supports it.
>> Even next generations (x540, x550) didn't provide support for reading thermal
>> data sensor.
>> As E610 is some type of extending x550 it also follows this path at this point.
>
>It is something you should consider. The machine disappears off the
>net for no obvious reason, and needs a cold boot to get it back? vs
>HWMON entries you can monitor, a warning when the critical value is
>reached, which probably reaches the network console and so gets logged
>somewhere, and then the emergency value which shuts down the NIC
>without any notification getting out of the box.
>
>Also, if there is temperature information, Linux can take an active
>part in managing it. If the critical value is reached, it could
>downshift to a lower link mode. Better to have a slower link than no
>link and a cold boot.
>
Yeah, definitely
But at this point there is no support from the device/FW itself, so
the approach presented here is the solution to give at least any info
to user, without device disappearing without any note.

Once there will be possibility to get FW temp data this will
be applied into already existing HWMON infrastructure.

Thanks
Jedrek