* Re: [PATCH net-next v10 0/6] pds_core: Add PLDM firmware update and host backed memory support
[not found] <20260728-upstream_v8-v10-0-46dafbd74571@amd.com>
@ 2026-07-28 22:52 ` Rao, Nikhil
2026-07-28 23:17 ` Jakub Kicinski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Rao, Nikhil @ 2026-07-28 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
Cc: Jakub Kicinski, Brett Creeley, Eric Joyner, Andrew Lunn,
David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Paolo Abeni, Jacob Keller,
Simon Horman, Vamsi Atluri, Nikhil P. Rao
On 7/28/2026 2:09 PM, Nikhil P. Rao wrote:
> This series adds PLDM-based firmware update support to the pds_core
> driver. PLDM (Platform Level Data Model) is a DMTF standard for firmware
> management that provides a vendor-neutral interface for firmware updates.
>
> The implementation uses the kernel's pldmfw library for package parsing
> and component matching. Users can update entire firmware packages or
> individual components via devlink flash. Component information is
> displayed via devlink info, showing firmware versions and update status
> for each component.
>
> The series also adds host backed memory support, allowing firmware to
> request memory pages from the host for its operations.
>
> Changes since v9:
> - Patch 3 (PLDM firmware update):
> - Fix a v9 rebase error that reintroduced an -EOPNOTSUPP guard in
> pdsc_dl_flash_update(), which rejected all per-component flash
> requests and made per-component update unreachable.
> - Implement per-component update using the pldmfw
> PLDMFW_UPDATE_MODE_SINGLE_COMPONENT mode and component_identifier
> instead of a driver-side component-name filter. The name filter
> silently reported success when the requested component was absent
> from the package (nothing was flashed); the framework mode rejects
> that case instead.
> - Link to v9: https://patch.msgid.link/20260724-upstream_v8-v9-0-8425762b8b7f@amd.com
>
Self-NAK for v10 -- per-component update is broken.
Patch 3 filters the package by a single device-side identifier
(PLDMFW_UPDATE_MODE_SINGLE_COMPONENT), but the same component type can
have different identifiers in the standard vs gold firmware packages, so
that identifier may be absent from the package and the update fails with
-ENOENT.
I will send a v11 that matches by component type against the
package contents, as in earlier versions.
Apologies for the churn.
Nikhil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread