From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli•us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel•org>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org, pabeni@redhat•com, davem@davemloft•net,
edumazet@google•com, leon@kernel•org, saeedm@nvidia•com,
moshe@nvidia•com, jesse.brandeburg@intel•com,
anthony.l.nguyen@intel•com, tariqt@nvidia•com, idosch@nvidia•com,
petrm@nvidia•com, simon.horman@corigine•com,
ecree.xilinx@gmail•com, habetsm.xilinx@gmail•com,
michal.wilczynski@intel•com, jacob.e.keller@intel•com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 14/15] devlink: move port_del() to devlink_port_ops
Date: Tue, 30 May 2023 08:58:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZHWep0dU9gCGJW0d@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230529184119.414d62f3@kernel.org>
Tue, May 30, 2023 at 03:41:19AM CEST, kuba@kernel•org wrote:
>On Mon, 29 May 2023 10:31:14 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >One could argue logically removing a port is also an operation of
>> >the parent (i.e. the devlink instance). The fact that the port gets
>> >destroyed in the process is secondary. Ergo maybe we should skip
>> >this patch?
>>
>> Well, the port_del() could differ for different port flavours. The
>> embedding structure of struct devlink_port is also different.
>>
>> Makes sense to me to skip the flavour switch and have one port_del() for
>> each port.
>
>The asymmetry bothers me. It's hard to comment on what the best
Yeah, I had the same problem with that, but after a lots of thinking,
it is a best I could think of. Please see below for the reasoning.
>approach is given this series shows no benefit of moving port_del().
>Maybe even a loss, as mlx5 now has an ifdef in two places:
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/devlink.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/devlink.c
>> index e39fd85ea2f9..63635cc44479 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/devlink.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/devlink.c
>> @@ -320,7 +320,6 @@ static const struct devlink_ops mlx5_devlink_ops = {
>> #endif
>> #ifdef CONFIG_MLX5_SF_MANAGER
>> .port_new = mlx5_devlink_sf_port_new,
>> - .port_del = mlx5_devlink_sf_port_del,
>> #endif
>> .flash_update = mlx5_devlink_flash_update,
>> .info_get = mlx5_devlink_info_get,
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/devlink_port.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/devlink_port.c
>> index 76c5d6e9d47f..f370f67d9e33 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/devlink_port.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/devlink_port.c
>> @@ -145,6 +145,9 @@ struct devlink_port *mlx5_esw_offloads_devlink_port(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw, u1
>> }
>>
>> static const struct devlink_port_ops mlx5_esw_dl_sf_port_ops = {
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MLX5_SF_MANAGER
>> + .port_del = mlx5_devlink_sf_port_del,
>> +#endif
Btw, this ifdef is going to go away in a follow-up patchset.
>> .port_fn_hw_addr_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_hw_addr_get,
>> .port_fn_hw_addr_set = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_hw_addr_set,
>> .port_fn_roce_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_roce_get,
>
>Is it okay if we deferred the port_del() patch until there's some
>clear benefit?
Well actually, there is a clear benefit even in this patchset:
We have 2 flavours of ports each with different ops in mlx5:
VF:
static const struct devlink_port_ops mlx5_esw_dl_port_ops = {
.port_fn_hw_addr_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_hw_addr_get,
.port_fn_hw_addr_set = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_hw_addr_set,
.port_fn_roce_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_roce_get,
.port_fn_roce_set = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_roce_set,
.port_fn_migratable_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_migratable_get,
.port_fn_migratable_set = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_migratable_set,
};
SF:
static const struct devlink_port_ops mlx5_esw_dl_sf_port_ops = {
.port_del = mlx5_devlink_sf_port_del,
.port_fn_hw_addr_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_hw_addr_get,
.port_fn_hw_addr_set = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_hw_addr_set,
.port_fn_roce_get = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_roce_get,
.port_fn_roce_set = mlx5_devlink_port_fn_roce_set,
.port_fn_state_get = mlx5_devlink_sf_port_fn_state_get,
.port_fn_state_set = mlx5_devlink_sf_port_fn_state_set,
};
You can see that the port_del() op is supported only on the SF flavour.
VF does not support it and therefore port_del() is not defined on it.
Without this patch, I would have to have a helper
mlx5_devlink_port_del() that would check if the port is SF and call
mlx5_devlink_sf_port_del() in that case. This patch reduces the
boilerplate.
Btw if you look at the cmd line api, it also aligns:
$ devlink port add pci/0000:08:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 101
pci/0000:08:00.0/32768: type eth netdev eth4 flavour pcisf controller 0 pfnum 0 sfnum 101 splittable false
function:
hw_addr 00:00:00:00:00:00 state inactive opstate detached
$ devlink port del pci/0000:08:00.0/32768
You use pci/0000:08:00.0/32768 as a delete handle.
port_del() is basically an object destructor. Would it perhaps help to
rename is to .port_destructor()? That would somehow ease the asymmetry
:) IDK. I would leave the name as it is a and move to port_ops.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-30 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-26 10:28 [patch net-next v2 00/15] devlink: move port ops into separate structure Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 01/15] devlink: introduce port ops placeholder Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 02/15] ice: register devlink port for PF with ops Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:52 ` Wilczynski, Michal
2023-05-26 11:35 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 03/15] mlxsw_core: register devlink port " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 04/15] nfp: devlink: " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 05/15] devlink: move port_split/unsplit() ops into devlink_port_ops Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 06/15] mlx4: register devlink port with ops Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 07/15] devlink: move port_type_set() op into devlink_port_ops Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 08/15] sfc: register devlink port with ops Jiri Pirko
2023-05-30 8:02 ` Martin Habets
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 09/15] mlx5: register devlink ports " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 10/15] devlink: move port_fn_hw_addr_get/set() to devlink_port_ops Jiri Pirko
2023-05-30 8:03 ` Martin Habets
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 11/15] devlink: move port_fn_roce_get/set() " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 12/15] devlink: move port_fn_migratable_get/set() " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 13/15] devlink: move port_fn_state_get/set() " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 14/15] devlink: move port_del() " Jiri Pirko
2023-05-27 4:10 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-05-27 7:42 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-05-29 6:33 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-05-29 8:31 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-05-30 1:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-05-30 6:33 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-05-30 6:58 ` Jiri Pirko [this message]
2023-05-30 17:34 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-05-31 6:33 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-06-01 22:16 ` Jacob Keller
2023-05-26 10:28 ` [patch net-next v2 15/15] devlink: save devlink_port_ops into a variable in devlink_port_function_validate() Jiri Pirko
2023-05-30 18:00 ` [patch net-next v2 00/15] devlink: move port ops into separate structure patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZHWep0dU9gCGJW0d@nanopsycho \
--to=jiri@resnulli$(echo .)us \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=ecree.xilinx@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=edumazet@google$(echo .)com \
--cc=habetsm.xilinx@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=idosch@nvidia$(echo .)com \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=kuba@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=leon@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=michal.wilczynski@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=moshe@nvidia$(echo .)com \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=petrm@nvidia$(echo .)com \
--cc=saeedm@nvidia$(echo .)com \
--cc=simon.horman@corigine$(echo .)com \
--cc=tariqt@nvidia$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox