netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/13] resource management using devlink reload

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]

Date:   Thu, 17 Nov 2022 19:38:48 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, jiri@...dia.com,
        anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, alexandr.lobakin@...el.com,
        wojciech.drewek@...el.com, lukasz.czapnik@...el.com,
        shiraz.saleem@...el.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
        mustafa.ismail@...el.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com,
        piotr.raczynski@...el.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com,
        david.m.ertman@...el.com, leszek.kaliszczuk@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/13] resource management using devlink reload

On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 02:39:50PM +0100, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 01:45:38PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 12:10:21PM +0100, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 07:59:43PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 01:04:36PM +0100, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 08:04:56AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 07:59:06PM -0600, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:
> > > > > > > On 11/15/2022 11:57 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:

<...>

> 
> Thanks for clarification.
> In summary, if this is really violation of PCI spec we for sure will
> have to fix that and resource managment implemented in this patchset
> will not make sense (as config for PF MSI-X amount will have to happen
> in FW).
> 
> If it isn't, is it still NACK from You? I mean, if we implement the
> devlink resources managment (maybe not generic one, only define in ice)
> and sysfs for setting VF MSI-X, will You be ok with that? Or using
> devlink to manage MSI-X resources isn't in general good solution?

NACK/ACK question is not for me, it is not my decision :)

I don't think that management of PCI specific parameters in devlink is
right idea. PCI has his own subsystem with rules and assumptions, netdev
shouldn't mangle them. In MSI-X case, this even more troublesome as users
sees these values through lspci without driver attached to it.

For example (very popular case), users creates VFs, unbinds driver from
all functions (PF and VFs) and pass them to VMs (bind to vfio driver).

Your solution being in wrong layer won't work there.

Thanks