netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/9] eth: fbnic: use fw uptime to detect fw crashes

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: <20250915174819.GA320514@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 18:48:19 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
	pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, alexanderduyck@...com,
	jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/9] eth: fbnic: use fw uptime to detect fw
 crashes

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 08:16:40AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2025 10:58:46 +0100 Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 01:14:21PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > Currently we only detect FW crashes when it stops responding
> > > to heartbeat messages. FW has a watchdog which will reset it
> > > in case of crashes. Use FW uptime sent in the heartbeat messages
> > > to detect that the watchdog has fired.  
> > 
> > I see that the time sent in heartbeat messages is critical to this check.
> > But the time sent in ownership messages is also used, right?
> 
> Fair, will add. I wasn't sure how to concisely include this.
> Ownership is kinda like the 0-th heartbeat in my mind..

Yeah, it was a bit of a nit pick.

> 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.c
> > > index 6e580654493c..72f750eea055 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.c
> > > @@ -495,6 +495,11 @@ int fbnic_fw_xmit_ownership_msg(struct fbnic_dev *fbd, bool take_ownership)
> > >  
> > >  	fbd->last_heartbeat_request = req_time;
> > >  
> > > +	/* Set prev_firmware_time to 0 to avoid triggering firmware crash
> > > +	 * detection now that we received a response from firmware.
> > > +	 */  
> > 
> > I'm having a bit of trouble understanding this comment.
> > Here we are sending an ownership message.
> > Have we (also) received a response from firmware?
> 
> Yes, sorry..
> 
> > > +	fbd->prev_firmware_time = 0;
> > > +
> > >  	/* Set heartbeat detection based on if we are taking ownership */
> > >  	fbd->fw_heartbeat_enabled = take_ownership;
> > >  
> > > @@ -671,6 +676,9 @@ static int fbnic_fw_parse_ownership_resp(void *opaque,
> > >  	/* Count the ownership response as a heartbeat reply */
> > >  	fbd->last_heartbeat_response = jiffies;
> > >  
> > > +	/* Capture firmware time for logging and firmware crash check */
> > > +	fbd->firmware_time = fta_get_uint(results, FBNIC_FW_HEARTBEAT_UPTIME);  
> > 
> > Maybe FBNIC_FW_OWNERSHIP_UPTIME?
> 
> ack!
> 
> Thanks for reviews!

Thanks. I did look over the rest of the series, and it looked good do me.
I'll plan to look over v2 too.