From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
Bin Luo <luobin9@huawei.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>,
Danielle Ratson <danieller@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 6/6] devlink: add overwrite mode to flash update
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 09:18:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200726071834.GC2216@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7d3a4dfb-ca4d-039a-9fad-2dcb5dbd9600@intel.com>
Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 08:21:22PM CEST, jacob.e.keller@intel.com wrote:
>
>
>On 7/22/2020 9:52 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:30:05 +0000 Keller, Jacob E wrote:
>>>> So perhaps we can introduce something like "component mask", which would
>>>> allow to flash only part of the component. That is basically what Jacob
>>>> has, I would just like to have it well defined.
>>>
>>> So, we could make this selection a series of masked bits instead of a
>>> single enumeration value.
>>
>> I'd still argue that components (as defined in devlink info) and config
>> are pretty orthogonal. In my experience config is stored in its own
>> section of the flash, and some of the knobs are in no obvious way
>> associated with components (used by components).
>>
>> That said, if we rename the "component mask" to "update mask" that's
>> fine with me.
>>
>> Then we'd have
>>
>> bit 0 - don't overwrite config
>> bit 1 - don't overwrite identifiers
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Let's define a bit for "don't update program" when we actually need it.
>>
>
>
>Ok. And this can be later extended with additional bits with new
>meanings should the need arise.
>
>Additionally, drivers can ensure that the valid combination of bits is
>set. the drivers can reject requests for combinations that they do not
>support.
Makes sense.
>
>I can make that change.
>
>My preference is that "0" for a bit means do not overwrite while "1"
>means overwrite. This way, if/when additional bits are added, drivers
>won't need to be updated to reject such requests. If we make "1" the "do
>not overwrite" then we'd have a case where drivers must update to ensure
>they reject requests which don't set the bit.
0 should be default and driver should bahave accordingly.
>
>Thanks,
>Jake
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-26 7:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-17 18:35 [RFC PATCH net-next v2 0/6] introduce PLDM firmware update library Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 1/6] ice: Add support for unified NVM update flow capability Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 2/6] ice: Add AdminQ commands for FW update Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 3/6] ice: add flags indicating pending update of firmware module Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 4/6] Add pldmfw library for PLDM firmware update Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 5/6] ice: implement device flash update via devlink Jacob Keller
2020-07-23 23:33 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 6/6] devlink: add overwrite mode to flash update Jacob Keller
2020-07-20 10:09 ` Jiri Pirko
2020-07-20 15:51 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-20 18:52 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-21 13:56 ` Jiri Pirko
2020-07-21 17:28 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-21 13:53 ` Jiri Pirko
2020-07-21 17:04 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-21 17:31 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-22 10:51 ` Jiri Pirko
2020-07-22 15:30 ` Keller, Jacob E
2020-07-22 16:52 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-22 18:21 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-26 7:18 ` Jiri Pirko [this message]
2020-07-27 18:11 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-29 22:49 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-29 23:16 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-29 23:59 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-26 7:16 ` Jiri Pirko
2020-07-27 18:13 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-28 11:19 ` Jiri Pirko
2020-07-28 16:58 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-28 17:09 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-28 17:43 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-28 22:59 ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-17 19:58 ` [RFC PATCH net-next v2 0/6] introduce PLDM firmware update library Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-17 21:00 ` Keller, Jacob E
2020-07-17 21:08 ` Keller, Jacob E
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200726071834.GC2216@nanopsycho \
--to=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=danieller@mellanox.com \
--cc=idosch@mellanox.com \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=jiri@mellanox.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=luobin9@huawei.com \
--cc=michael.chan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=saeedm@mellanox.com \
--cc=tom@herbertland.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox