netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] ionic: support sr-iov operations

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

Message-ID: <20191212133540.3992ac0c@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:35:40 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Shannon Nelson <snelson@...sando.io>
Cc:     Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] ionic: support sr-iov operations

On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 11:59:50 -0800, Shannon Nelson wrote:
> On 12/12/19 11:52 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 06:53:42 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:  
> >>>   static void ionic_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> >>>   {
> >>>   	struct ionic *ionic = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
> >>> @@ -257,6 +338,9 @@ static void ionic_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> >>>   	if (!ionic)
> >>>   		return;
> >>>   
> >>> +	if (pci_num_vf(pdev))
> >>> +		ionic_sriov_configure(pdev, 0);
> >>> +  
> >> Usually sriov is left enabled while removing PF.
> >> It is not the role of the pci PF removal to disable it sriov.  
> > I don't think that's true. I consider igb and ixgbe to set the standard
> > for legacy SR-IOV handling since they were one of the first (the first?)
> > and Alex Duyck wrote them.
> >
> > mlx4, bnxt and nfp all disable SR-IOV on remove.  
> 
> This was my understanding as well, but now I can see that ixgbe and i40e 
> are both checking for existing VFs in probe and setting up to use them, 
> as well as the newer ice driver.  I found this today by looking for 
> where they use pci_num_vf().

Right, if the VFs very already enabled on probe they are set up.

It's a bit of a asymmetric design, in case some other driver left
SR-IOV on, I guess.