On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 03:02:18PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 5/16/19 12:55 PM, Nikunj Kela (nkela) wrote: > > > > > > On 5/16/19, 12:35 PM, "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirs...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +0000, Nikunj Kela wrote: > > >> Some of the broken NICs don't have EEPROM programmed correctly. It > > >> results > > >> in probe to fail. This change adds a module parameter that can be > > >> used to > > >> ignore nvm checksum validation. > > >> > > >> Cc: xe-linux-exter...@cisco.com > > >> Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela <nk...@cisco.com> > > >> --- > > >> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 28 > > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > >NAK for two reasons. First, module parameters are not desirable > > >because their individual to one driver and a global solution should be > > >found so that all networking device drivers can use the solution. This > > >will keep the interface to change/setup/modify networking drivers > > >consistent for all drivers. > > > > > > >Second and more importantly, if your NIC is broken, fix it. Do not try > > >and create a software workaround so that you can continue to use a > > >broken NIC. There are methods/tools available to properly reprogram > > >the EEPROM on a NIC, which is the right solution for your issue. > > > > I am proposing this as a debug parameter. Obviously, we need to fix EEPROM > > but this helps us continuing the development while manufacturing fixes NIC. > > Then why even bother with sending this upstream?
It seems rather drastic to disable the entire driver because the checksum doesn't match. It really should be a warning, even a big warning, to let people know something is wrong, but disabling the whole driver doesn't make sense. Daniel
