Message-ID: <CABvr3-G3w2nWuUrvX7KTJXa59EPivc2K7iJiV1bQ+Cn9cX7j2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2017 13:38:18 +0200
From:   Ariel Almog <arielalmogworkemails@...il.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
Cc:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] RESEND - rdmatool - tool for RDMA users

> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 08:33:26AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 01:45:14PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On 01/18/2017 10:31 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > I think it depends on what this tool is supposed to cover, but based
> > > > on the description, I would start with netlink-only.
> > > >
> > > > The only place verbs covers a similar ground is in 'device
> > > > capabilities' - for some of that you might want to open a new-uAPI
> > > > verbs fd, but even the capability data from that would not be
> > > > totally offensive to be accessed over netlink.
> > > >
> > > > IMHO netlink should cover almost everything found in sysfs today.
> > >
> > > We would need a very strong argument to introduce a netlink API that
> > > duplicates existing sysfs API functionality. Since the sysfs API is
> > > extensible, why not extend that API further? E.g. the SCST sysfs API
> > > shows that more is possible with sysfs than what most kernel drivers
> > > realize.
> >
> > We didn't look deeply on sysfs mainly because it is unpopular
> > in netdev community. Maybe we were misled and it is simply not true.
>
> sysfs is unpopular because the 'one value per file' dogma is laregly
> unsuitable for complex mulit-value atomic changes which are common in
> netdev. You can force it to work, but it is pretty horrible..
>
> It is also very expensive if you want to shuttle a lot of data, eg I
> could not see doing something like 'netstat' for IB through sysfs
>
> Maybe you should start by showing some examples of command out you
> wish to have in a rdmatool ..
>

sysfs has the 'one value per file' dogma as you wrote and hence driver will
be complicated to maintain

netlink is a simple socket interface, it provides duplex communication,
allows easy expansion and is used by many tools (iproute2, 802.11 wireless
drivers, NFC, OVS and more).

iproute2 [1] provides a collection of utilities for controlling TCP/IP
networking and traffic utilities for network control. it includes
many tools, such as ip, devlink and more. using the iproute2 working frame
will allow rdmatool to be distributed easily.

Regarding the command samples, I was thinking of using the following
methodology (similar to devlink [2])

SYNOPSIS
rdmatool [ OPTIONS ] OBJECT { COMMAND | help }
OBJECT := { dev | protocol }
OPTIONS := { -V[ersion] }

OPTIONS
-V, -Version
Print the version of the rdmatool utility and exit.

OBJECT
dev - rdma device.
Protocol – protocol level

COMMAND (examples, will be enhanced)

rdmatool dev help
provide help on the command

rdmatool dev show [DEV]
display rdma device attributes
[DEV] - specifies the rdma device. if this argument is omitted all
devices are listed.

rdmatool dev interfaces [DEV]
display rdma device interfaces
rdmatool dev connections [DEV]
display rdma device connections
rdmatool dev resources [PROCESS]
display the device resources, e.g. qp, cp, etc.
[PROCESS] - specifies the resources of a specific process

rdmatool dev stat [DEV]
display rdma device statistics
rdmatool protocol show [PROTOCOL] [ENTITY]
display roce protocol attributes
[PROTOCOL] - specifies the protocol, e.g. roce, iwrap, etc.
[ENTITTY] - specifies the entity, e.g. qos, etc.

rdmatool dev debug [DEV] [DEBUG_INFO]
set/query debug on DEV
[DEBUG_INFO] - debug configuration, optional, might be vendor specific

References:
[1] iproute2
https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/iproute2
[2] devlink
http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/devlink.8.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists