netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] devlink: Add new "max_vf

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: <3c830f86-a814-d564-df7d-670d294b8890@nvidia.com>
Date:   Sun, 23 Oct 2022 14:28:24 +0300
From:   Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc:     Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Peng Zhang <peng.zhang@...igine.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...igine.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] devlink: Add new "max_vf_queue" generic
 device param

On 19/10/2022 17:09, Simon Horman wrote:
> From: Peng Zhang <peng.zhang@...igine.com>
>
> VF max-queue-number is the MAX num of queues which the VF has.
>
> Add new device generic parameter to configure the max-queue-number
> of the each VF to be generated dynamically.
>
> The string format is decided ad vendor specific. The suggested
> format is ...-V-W-X-Y-Z, the V represents generating V VFs that
> have 16 queues, the W represents generating W VFs that have 8
> queues, and so on, the Z represents generating Z VFs that have
> 1 queue.

Having a vendor specific string contradicts the point of having a
generic parameter, why not do it as a vendor param, or generalize the
string?

>
> For example, to configure
> * 1x VF with 128 queues
> * 1x VF with 64 queues
> * 0x VF with 32 queues
> * 0x VF with 16 queues
> * 12x VF with 8 queues
> * 2x VF with 4 queues
> * 2x VF with 2 queues
> * 0x VF with 1 queue, execute:
>
> $ devlink dev param set pci/0000:01:00.0 \
>                           name max_vf_queue value \
>                           "1-1-0-0-12-2-2-0" cmode runtime
>
> When created VF number is bigger than that is configured by this
> parameter, the extra VFs' max-queue-number is decided as vendor
> specific.
>
> If the config doesn't be set, the VFs' max-queue-number is decided
> as vendor specific.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Zhang <peng.zhang@...igine.com>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
>

Does this command have to be run before the VFs are created? What
happens to existing VFs?