netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] staging: qlge: Initialize devlink health dump framework for the dlge driver

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: <20201015033732.qaihehernm2jzoln@Rk>
Date:   Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:37:32 +0800
From:   Coiby Xu <coiby.xu@...il.com>
To:     Benjamin Poirier <benjamin.poirier@...il.com>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@...e.com>,
        Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>,
        "supporter:QLOGIC QLGE 10Gb ETHERNET DRIVER" 
        <GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:QLOGIC QLGE 10Gb ETHERNET DRIVER" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] staging: qlge: Initialize devlink health dump
 framework for the dlge driver

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 09:37:04AM +0900, Benjamin Poirier wrote:
>On 2020-10-12 19:24 +0800, Coiby Xu wrote:
>[...]
>> > I think, but didn't check in depth, that in those drivers, the devlink
>> > device is tied to the pci device and can exist independently of the
>> > netdev, at least in principle.
>> >
>> You are right. Take drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw as an example,
>> devlink reload would first first unregister_netdev and then
>> register_netdev but struct devlink stays put. But I have yet to
>> understand when unregister/register_netdev is needed.
>
>Maybe it can be useful to manually recover if the hardware or driver
>gets in an erroneous state. I've used `modprobe -r qlge && modprobe
>qlge` for the same in the past.

Thank you for providing this user case!
>
>> Do we need to
>> add "devlink reload" for qlge?
>
>Not for this patchset. That would be a new feature.

To implement this feature, it seems I need to understand how qlge work
under the hood. For example, what's the difference between
qlge_soft_reset_mpi_risc and qlge_hard_reset_mpi_risc? Or should we use
a brute-force way like do the tasks in qlge_remove and then re-do the
tasks in qlge_probe? Is a hardware reference manual for qlge device?

--
Best regards,
Coiby