Subject: RE: [PATCH 07/22] RDMA/irdma: Register an auxiliary driver and implement private channel OPs

From: "Saleem, Shiraz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2021 01:19:22 +0000

> Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/22] RDMA/irdma: Register an auxiliary driver and
> implement private channel OPs
> 
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 02:42:48PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:48:12PM -0600, Shiraz Saleem wrote:
> > > +/**
> > > + * irdma_init_dev - GEN_2 device init
> > > + * @aux_dev: auxiliary device
> > > + *
> > > + * Create device resources, set up queues, pble and hmc objects.
> > > + * Return 0 if successful, otherwise return error  */ int
> > > +irdma_init_dev(struct auxiliary_device *aux_dev) {
> > > +	struct iidc_auxiliary_object *vo = container_of(aux_dev,
> > > +							struct
> iidc_auxiliary_object,
> > > +							adev);
> > > +	struct iidc_peer_obj *peer_info = vo->peer_obj;
> > > +	struct irdma_handler *hdl;
> > > +	struct irdma_pci_f *rf;
> > > +	struct irdma_sc_dev *dev;
> > > +	struct irdma_priv_peer_info *priv_peer_info;
> > > +	int err;
> > > +
> > > +	hdl = irdma_find_handler(peer_info->pdev);
> > > +	if (hdl)
> > > +		return -EBUSY;
> > > +
> > > +	hdl = kzalloc(sizeof(*hdl), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > +	if (!hdl)
> > > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > +	rf = &hdl->rf;
> > > +	priv_peer_info = &rf->priv_peer_info;
> > > +	rf->aux_dev = aux_dev;
> > > +	rf->hdl = hdl;
> > > +	dev = &rf->sc_dev;
> > > +	dev->back_dev = rf;
> > > +	rf->gen_ops.init_hw = icrdma_init_hw;
> > > +	rf->gen_ops.request_reset = icrdma_request_reset;
> > > +	rf->gen_ops.register_qset = irdma_lan_register_qset;
> > > +	rf->gen_ops.unregister_qset = irdma_lan_unregister_qset;
> > > +	priv_peer_info->peer_info = peer_info;
> > > +	rf->rdma_ver = IRDMA_GEN_2;
> > > +	irdma_set_config_params(rf);
> > > +	dev->pci_rev = peer_info->pdev->revision;
> > > +	rf->default_vsi.vsi_idx = peer_info->pf_vsi_num;
> > > +	/* save information from peer_info to priv_peer_info*/
> > > +	priv_peer_info->fn_num = PCI_FUNC(peer_info->pdev->devfn);
> > > +	rf->hw.hw_addr = peer_info->hw_addr;
> > > +	rf->pcidev = peer_info->pdev;
> > > +	rf->netdev = peer_info->netdev;
> > > +	priv_peer_info->ftype = peer_info->ftype;
> > > +	priv_peer_info->msix_count = peer_info->msix_count;
> > > +	priv_peer_info->msix_entries = peer_info->msix_entries;
> > > +	irdma_add_handler(hdl);
> > > +	if (irdma_ctrl_init_hw(rf)) {
> > > +		err = -EIO;
> > > +		goto err_ctrl_init;
> > > +	}
> > > +	peer_info->peer_ops = &irdma_peer_ops;
> > > +	peer_info->peer_drv = &irdma_peer_drv;
> > > +	err = peer_info->ops->peer_register(peer_info);
> > > +	if (err)
> > > +		goto err_peer_reg;
> >
> > No to this, I don't want to see aux bus layered on top of another
> > management framework in new drivers. When this driver uses aux bus get
> > rid of the old i40iw stuff. I already said this in one of the older
> > postings of this driver.
> >
> > auxbus probe() for a RDMA driver should call ib_alloc_device() near
> > its start and ib_register_device() near the end its end.
> >
> > drvdata for the aux device should point to the driver struct
> > containing the ib_device.
> 
> My other expectation is to see at least two aux_drivers, one for the RoCE and
> another for the iWARP. It will allow easy management for the users if they decide
> to disable/enable specific functionality (/sys/bus/auxiliary/device/*). It will simplify
> code management too.
> 

Do you mean 2 different auxiliary device names - one for RoCE and iWARP?
The drv.probe() and other callbacks will be very similar for gen2, so one gen2 aux driver
which can bind to iW and RoCE aux device should suffice.

Shiraz