From: Brelinski, TonyX Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 6:32 PM To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>; Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> Cc: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.ngu...@intel.com>; da...@davemloft.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org; sassm...@redhat.com Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 04/15] ice: add devlink parameters to read and write minimum security revision
From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 1:54 PM To: Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> Cc: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.ngu...@intel.com>; da...@davemloft.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org; sassm...@redhat.com; Brelinski, TonyX <tonyx.brelin...@intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 04/15] ice: add devlink parameters to read and write minimum security revision On 2/4/2021 11:10 AM, Jacob Keller wrote: > I'd rather see the right solution designed here, so if this isn't the > right direction I want to work with the list to figure out what makes > the most sense. (Even if that's "minimum security should update > automatically"). > I want to clarify here based on feedback I received from customer support engineers: We believe it is not acceptable to update this automatically, because not all customers want that behavior and would prefer to have control over when to lock in the minimum security revision. Previous products have behaved this way and we had significant feedback when this occurred that many of our customers were unhappy about this, even after we explained the reasoning. I do not believe that we can accept an automatic/default update of minimum security revision. ---------------------------------------------- Scratch that. I replied to the wrong email. Sorry about that.
