[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240826132213.4c8039c0@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:22:13 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Wei Huang <wei.huang2@....com>
Cc: <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, <helgaas@...nel.org>, <corbet@....net>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<alex.williamson@...hat.com>, <gospo@...adcom.com>,
<michael.chan@...adcom.com>, <ajit.khaparde@...adcom.com>,
<somnath.kotur@...adcom.com>, <andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com>,
<manoj.panicker2@....com>, <Eric.VanTassell@....com>,
<vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>, <horms@...nel.org>, <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
<bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <lukas@...ner.de>, <paul.e.luse@...el.com>,
<jing2.liu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 11/12] bnxt_en: Add TPH support in BNXT driver
On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:41:19 -0500 Wei Huang wrote:
> + rtnl_lock();
> + bnxt_close_nic(irq->bp, false, false);
> + bnxt_open_nic(irq->bp, false, false);
> + rtnl_unlock();
This code means that under memory pressure changing CPU affinity
can take the machine offline. The entire machine, even if container
orchestration is trying to just move a few IRQs in place for a new
container.
We can't let you do this, it will set a bad precedent. I can't think
of any modern driver with reconfiguration safety as bad as bnxt.
Technical debt coming due.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists