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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:08:50 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com> Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>, "david.m.ertman@...el.com" <david.m.ertman@...el.com>, "dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, "kiran.patil@...el.com" <kiran.patil@...el.com>, "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, Vu Pham <vuhuong@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com> Subject: Re: [net-next v5 05/15] devlink: Support get and set state of port function On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 05:15:04 +0000 Parav Pandit wrote: > > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 6:08 AM > > > > On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 01:03:48 -0800 Saeed Mahameed wrote: > > > From: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com> > > > > > > devlink port function can be in active or inactive state. > > > Allow users to get and set port function's state. > > > > > > When the port function it activated, its operational state may change > > > after a while when the device is created and driver binds to it. > > > Similarly on deactivation flow. > > > > So what's the flow device should implement? > > > > User requests deactivated, the device sends a notification to the driver > > bound to the device. What if the driver ignores it? > > > If driver ignores it, those devices are marked unusable for new allocation. > Device becomes usable only after it has act on the event. But the device remains fully operational? So if I'm an admin who wants to unplug a misbehaving "entity"[1] the deactivate is not gonna help me, it's just a graceful hint? Is there no need for a forceful shutdown? [1] refer to earlier email, IDK what entity is supposed to use this > > > + * @DEVLINK_PORT_FUNCTION_OPSTATE_DETACHED: Driver is detached > > from the function of port; it is > > > + * safe to delete the port. > > > + */ > > > +enum devlink_port_function_opstate { > > > + DEVLINK_PORT_FUNCTION_OPSTATE_DETACHED, > > > > The port function must be some Mellanox speak - for the second time - I > > have no idea what it means. Please use meaningful names. > > > It is not a Mellanox term. > Port function object is the one that represents function behind this port. > It is not a new term. Port function already exists in devlink whose operational state attribute is defined here. I must have missed that in review. PCI functions can host multiple ports. So "port function" does not compute for me. Can we drop the "function"?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists