netdev - Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v2 0/5] Dynamically assign MSI-X vectors count

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: <20210114095128.0f388f08@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:51:28 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v2 0/5] Dynamically assign MSI-X vectors count

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:31:35 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> The number of MSI-X vectors is PCI property visible through lspci, that
> field is read-only and configured by the device.
> 
> The static assignment of an amount of MSI-X vectors doesn't allow utilize
> the newly created VF because it is not known to the device the future load
> and configuration where that VF will be used.
> 
> The VFs are created on the hypervisor and forwarded to the VMs that have
> different properties (for example number of CPUs).
> 
> To overcome the inefficiency in the spread of such MSI-X vectors, we
> allow the kernel to instruct the device with the needed number of such
> vectors, before VF is initialized and bounded to the driver.


Hi Leon!

Looks like you got some missing kdoc here, check out the test in
patchwork so we don't need to worry about this later:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=414497