Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-163288-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 20:23:31 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Danielle Ratson <danieller@nvidia.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <davem@davemloft.net>, <edumazet@google.com>,
 <pabeni@redhat.com>, <corbet@lwn.net>, <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
 <sdf@google.com>, <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>,
 <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>, <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
 <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>, <ahmed.zaki@intel.com>,
 <richardcochran@gmail.com>, <shayagr@amazon.com>,
 <paul.greenwalt@intel.com>, <jiri@resnulli.us>,
 <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 <mlxsw@nvidia.com>, <petrm@nvidia.com>, <idosch@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 10/10] ethtool: Veto some operations during
 firmware flashing process
Message-ID: <20240429202331.29f3dafa@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20240424133023.4150624-11-danieller@nvidia.com>
References: <20240424133023.4150624-1-danieller@nvidia.com>
	<20240424133023.4150624-11-danieller@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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.