netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] bnxt: Create an auxiliary device for fwctl

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: <ccdz4sq2dzclxhevnj4ecfbehgtbiiw4pxtwctvknjzlvp72fl@lvfpjzfekm6z>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 13:49:12 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, 
	"Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@....com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, 
	Andy Gospodarek <andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com>, Aron Silverton <aron.silverton@...cle.com>, 
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>, 
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, 
	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...adcom.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, 
	Itay Avraham <itayavr@...dia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, 
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, Leonid Bloch <lbloch@...dia.com>, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] bnxt: Create an auxiliary device for fwctl_bnxt

Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 02:03:56AM +0100, saeed@...nel.org wrote:
>On 12 Feb 15:22, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:36:37AM -0800, Nelson, Shannon wrote:
>> > On 2/10/2025 11:55 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 05:04:23PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> > > > On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 21:16:47 -0400 Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> > > > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 01:51:11PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > But if you agree the netdev doesn't need it seems like a fairly
>> > > > > > straightforward way to unblock your progress.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm trying to understand what you are suggesting here.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > We have many scenarios where mlx5_core spawns all kinds of different
>> > > > > devices, including recovery cases where there is no networking at all
>> > > > > and only fwctl. So we can't just discard the aux dev or mlx5_core
>> > > > > triggered setup without breaking scenarios.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > However, you seem to be suggesting that netdev-only configurations (ie
>> > > > > netdev loaded but no rdma loaded) should disable fwctl. Is that the
>> > > > > case? All else would remain the same. It is very ugly but I could see
>> > > > > a technical path to do it, and would consider it if that brings peace.
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, when RDMA driver is not loaded there should be no access to fwctl.
>> > >
>> > > There are users mentioned in cover letter, which need FWCTL without RDMA.
>> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/0-v4-0cf4ec3b8143+4995-fwctl_jgg@nvidia.com/
>> > >
>> > > I want to suggest something different. What about to move all XXX_core
>> > > logic (mlx5_core, bnxt_core, e.t.c.) from netdev to some other dedicated
>> > > place?
>> > >
>> > > There is no technical need to have PCI/FW logic inside networking stack.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks
>> > 
>> > Our pds_core device fits this description as well: it is not an ethernet PCI
>> > device, but helps manage the FW/HW for Eth and other things that are
>> > separate PCI functions.  We ended up in the netdev arena because we first
>> > went in as a support for vDPA VFs.
>> > 
>> > Should these 'core' devices live in linux-pci land?  Is it possible that
>> > some 'core' things might be platform devices rather than PCI?
>> 
>> IMHO, linux-pci was right place before FWCTL and auxbus arrived, but now
>> these core drivers can be placed in drivers/fwctl instead. It will be natural
>+1
>
>Fwctl subsystem is perfect for shared modules that need to initialize the
>pci device to a minimal state where fwctl uAPIs are enabled for debug and
>bare metal device configs while aux sunsystem can carry out the
>spawning of other subsystems.

Wouldn't it be better to call it drivers/core/ and have corectl or
corefwctl ?


>
>> place for them as they will be located near the UAPI which provides an access
>> to them.
>> 
>> All other components will be auxbus devices in their respective
>> subsystems (eth, RDMA ...).
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> > 
>> > sln
>> > 
>> > 
>> 
>