netdev - Re: [PATCH 5/5] ixgbe: add driver set_max

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAE9FiQXG1MGitFzv94CW+EUugntQR4C+8i4946K7ycHJA5WpGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 3 Oct 2012 13:37:18 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
Cc:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>, yuvalmin@...adcom.com,
	bhutchings@...arflare.com, gregory.v.rose@...el.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ixgbe: add driver set_max_vfs support

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Alexander Duyck
<alexander.h.duyck@...el.com> wrote:
> The ixgbe_set_max_vfs function has several issues.  The two big ones are
> that this function assumes it can just enable/disable SR-IOV without any
> other changes being necessary which is not the case.  I would recommend
> looking at ixgbe_setup_tc for how to do this properly.  Secondly is the
> fact that this code will change the PF network device and as such
> sections of the code should be called with the RTNL lock held.  In
> addition I believe you have to disable SR-IOV before enabling it again
> with a different number of VFs.

yes, agreed.

>
> Below is a link to one of the early patches for igb when we were first
> introducing SR-IOV, and the in-driver sysfs value had been rejected.  I
> figure it might be useful as it was also using sysfs to enable/disable
> VFs.  It however doesn't have the correct locking on changing the queues
> and as such will likely throw an error if you were to implement it the
> same way now:
> http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2009/04/08/34

yes, that is almost there if put that in-driver value to per device
value and ops.

Thanks

Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html