netdev - Re: [iwl-next v4 5/8] ice: allocate devlink for subfunction

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: <ZiE_nUEsGT8Cd3BK@nanopsycho>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:43:25 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jacob.e.keller@...el.com, michal.kubiak@...el.com,
	maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com, sridhar.samudrala@...el.com,
	przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com, wojciech.drewek@...el.com,
	pio.raczynski@...il.com, jiri@...dia.com,
	mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com
Subject: Re: [iwl-next v4 5/8] ice: allocate devlink for subfunction

Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:46:23PM CEST, michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 03:02:49PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 02:48:53PM CEST, michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>> >On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 02:04:21PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 04:20:25PM CEST, michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>> >> >From: Piotr Raczynski <piotr.raczynski@...el.com>
>> >> 
>> >> [...]
>> >> 
>> >> >+/**
>> >> >+ * ice_allocate_sf - Allocate devlink and return SF structure pointer
>> >> >+ * @dev: the device to allocate for
>> >> >+ *
>> >> >+ * Allocate a devlink instance for SF.
>> >> >+ *
>> >> >+ * Return: void pointer to allocated memory
>> >> >+ */
>> >> >+struct ice_sf_priv *ice_allocate_sf(struct device *dev)
>> >> 
>> >> This is devlink instance for SF auxdev. Please make sure it is properly
>> >> linked with the devlink port instance using devl_port_fn_devlink_set()
>> >> See mlx5 implementation for inspiration.
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >
>> >I am going to do it in the last patchset. I know that it isn't the best
>> 
>> Where? Either I'm blind or you don't do it.
>> 
>> 
>
>You told me to split few patches from first patchset [1]. We agree that
>there will be too many patches for one submission, so I split it into
>3:
>- 1/3 devlink prework (already accepted)
>- 2/3 base subfunction (this patchset)
>- 3/3 port representor refactor to support subfunction (I am going to
>  include it there)

Sorry, but how is this relevant to my suggestion to use
devl_port_fn_devlink_set() which you apparently don't?


>
>[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240301115414.502097-1-michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com/
>
>Thanks,
>Michal
>
>> >option to split patchesets like that, but it was hard to do it differently.
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >Michal
>> >
>> >> >+{
>> >> >+	return ice_devlink_alloc(dev, sizeof(struct ice_sf_priv),
>> >> >+				 &ice_sf_devlink_ops);
>> >> >+}
>> >> >+
>> >> 
>> >> [...]