netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] netdevsim: add couple of fw_update_flash

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: <tthpdv4l52zql7ms6q7723tbpzlacbf5ryzsx3qj3mafrzslfg@5ltgsitmnxun>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 10:55:35 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] netdevsim: add couple of fw_update_flash_*
 debugfs knobs

Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 01:04:57AM +0200, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 23:27:34 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Netdevsim emulates firmware update and it takes 5 seconds to complete.
>> For some usecases, this is too long and unnecessary. Allow user to
>> configure the time by exposing debugfs knobs to set flash size, chunk
>> size and chunk time.
>
>FWIW I also find the long delays annoying when running the test
>manually. But do we need knobs for all the constants? Maybe cut
>down the size to something more reasonable and expose just one
>knob to control the length of the msleep()?

Sure.

>-- 
>pw-bot: cr