netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: txgbe: expend SW-FW mailbox buffer size to identify QSFP module

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: <002301dc3a52$63a80fc0$2af82f40$@trustnetic.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2025 09:57:24 +0800
From: Jiawen Wu <jiawenwu@...stnetic.com>
To: "'Andrew Lunn'" <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: "'Simon Horman'" <horms@...nel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'Andrew Lunn'" <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"'David S. Miller'" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"'Eric Dumazet'" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"'Jakub Kicinski'" <kuba@...nel.org>,
	"'Paolo Abeni'" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"'Russell King \(Oracle\)'" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
	"'Mengyuan Lou'" <mengyuanlou@...-swift.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: txgbe: expend SW-FW mailbox buffer size to identify QSFP module

On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 9:53 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 03:42:00PM +0800, Jiawen Wu wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 9:52 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2025 at 05:39:21PM +0800, Jiawen Wu wrote:
> > > > In order to identify 40G and 100G QSFP modules, expend mailbox buffer
> > > > size to store more information read from the firmware.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I see that the message size is increased by 4 bytes,
> > > including two new one-byte fields.
> > > But I don't see how that is used by this patchset.
> > > Could you expand on this a little?
> >
> > It is used for QSFP modules, I haven't added the part of these modules yet.
> > But the firmware was changed. So when using the new firmware, the module
> > cannot be identified due to incorrect length of mailbox buffer.
> 
> And with old firmware? Can you tell the end of the message has not
> been filled in with old firmware?

The old firmware has not been released to the public, so there is no need
to worry about the compatibility on the old firmware.