> -----Original Message----- > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, 30 April 2024 6:24 > To: Danielle Ratson <danieller@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; > pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; corbet@xxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > sdf@xxxxxxxxxx; kory.maincent@xxxxxxxxxxx; > maxime.chevallier@xxxxxxxxxxx; vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx; > przemyslaw.kitszel@xxxxxxxxx; ahmed.zaki@xxxxxxxxx; > richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx; shayagr@xxxxxxxxxx; > paul.greenwalt@xxxxxxxxx; jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mlxsw <mlxsw@xxxxxxxxxx>; Petr Machata > <petrm@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ido Schimmel <idosch@xxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 10/10] ethtool: Veto some operations during > firmware flashing process > > On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 16:30:23 +0300 Danielle Ratson wrote: > > Some operations cannot be performed during the firmware flashing process. > > > > For example: > > > > - Port must be down during the whole flashing process to avoid packet loss > > while committing reset for example. > > > > - Writing to EEPROM interrupts the flashing process, so operations like > > ethtool dump, module reset, get and set power mode should be vetoed. > > > > - Split port firmware flashing should be vetoed. > > > > - Flashing firmware on a device which is already in a flashing process > > should be forbidden. > > > > Use the 'module_fw_flashing_in_progress' flag introduced in a previous > > patch to veto those operations and prevent interruptions while > > preforming module firmware flash. > > Feels a little out of order to add this check after the functionality. > I'd merge this with patch 5. Hi Jakub, Some of this code is only presented in patch 9, so it will cause splitting some of the vetoes in patch 5 and some of it where the code around is presented. Does it sound reasonable to you? Thanks, Danielle
