Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-17 Thread Daniel Walker
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 09:58:46AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > I don't think you can say because the checksum is valid that all data > > contained > > inside is also valid. You can have a valid checksum , and someone screwed > > up the > > data prior to the checksum getting computed. > > I

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-17 Thread Alexander Duyck
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 9:36 AM Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 08:16:34AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 6:48 PM Florian Fainelli > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/16/2019 6:03 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 03:02:18PM

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-17 Thread Florian Fainelli
On 5/17/19 9:36 AM, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 08:16:34AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: >> On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 6:48 PM Florian Fainelli >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 5/16/2019 6:03 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 03:02:18PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrot

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-17 Thread Daniel Walker
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 08:16:34AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 6:48 PM Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > > > > > > On 5/16/2019 6:03 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 03:02:18PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > >> On 5/16/19 12:55 PM, Nikunj Kela (nke

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-17 Thread Alexander Duyck
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 6:48 PM Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > > On 5/16/2019 6:03 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > 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" wrote: > >>>

Re: [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-16 Thread Florian Fainelli
On 5/16/2019 6:03 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > 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" wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +, Nikunj Kela wrote: >>>>> S

Re: [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-16 Thread Daniel Walker
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" wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +, Nikunj Kela wrote: > >>> Some of the broken NICs don't have EEPROM progr

Re: [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-16 Thread Nikunj Kela (nkela)
On 5/16/19, 3:02 PM, "Florian Fainelli" wrote: On 5/16/19 12:55 PM, Nikunj Kela (nkela) wrote: >> >> >> On 5/16/19, 12:35 PM, "Jeff Kirsher" wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +, Nikunj Kela wrote: >>>> Some of the broken NICs don't have EEPROM

Re: [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-16 Thread Florian Fainelli
On 5/16/19 12:55 PM, Nikunj Kela (nkela) wrote: > > > On 5/16/19, 12:35 PM, "Jeff Kirsher" wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +, Nikunj Kela wrote: >>> Some of the broken NICs don't have EEPROM programmed correctly. It >>> results >>> in probe to fail. This change adds a

Re: [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-16 Thread Nikunj Kela (nkela)
On 5/16/19, 12:35 PM, "Jeff Kirsher" wrote: On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +, 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 che

Re: [PATCH] igb: add parameter to ignore nvm checksum validation

2019-05-16 Thread Jeff Kirsher
On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 23:14 +, 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: