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

["Nikunj Kela (nkela)" <nkela@cisco.com>]

On 5/16/19, 3:02 PM, "Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 5/16/19 12:55 PM, Nikunj Kela (nkela) wrote:
    >> 
    >> 
    >> On 5/16/19, 12:35 PM, "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@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-external@cisco.com
    >>    >> Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela <nkela@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?
    >-- 
    >Florian

My colleagues wanted me to upstream so if there is anyone else in the same situations, maybe there is a better solution.