From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4317EC10F14 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 094CB20811 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=Mellanox.com header.i=@Mellanox.com header.b="EEyakh55" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725946AbfDWF0J (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Apr 2019 01:26:09 -0400 Received: from mail-eopbgr50044.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.5.44]:11011 "EHLO EUR03-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725888AbfDWF0J (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Apr 2019 01:26:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Mellanox.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kjLN6zeAKoTj/3HHWFcgb5BE/Vughoo5G2uahgKtkis=; b=EEyakh555fAFj4llnuLlUYCkIAM1xfk4TtLe96Mx2LWH9VFXpRlUBp+7UgSQn4fCo78J5f2UpWJftTckyCT7YxrsSlo3KnYjNBAhW05uXVHipq+B56juDtDHkfgbvFDzFJT4iB5pxV9ZLxlW8gcLggzSC2v5RSoatwWaMaglZ2M= Received: from VI1PR05MB5934.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.178.126.87) by VI1PR05MB3261.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.170.238.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1813.17; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:26:06 +0000 Received: from VI1PR05MB5934.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::681f:c11e:af41:6300]) by VI1PR05MB5934.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::681f:c11e:af41:6300%5]) with mapi id 15.20.1813.017; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:26:06 +0000 From: Ido Schimmel To: Jakub Kicinski CC: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , Jiri Pirko , Petr Machata , Alex Kushnarov , mlxsw Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/14] mlxsw: Shared buffer improvements Thread-Topic: [PATCH net-next 00/14] mlxsw: Shared buffer improvements Thread-Index: AQHU+QQeHJkRb7b7mU2RZnzuX73IUqZIr5iAgACIdAA= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:26:06 +0000 Message-ID: <20190423052602.GA1735@splinter> References: <20190422120803.14435-1-idosch@mellanox.com> <20190422141739.4812894b@cakuba.netronome.com> In-Reply-To: <20190422141739.4812894b@cakuba.netronome.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-clientproxiedby: AM5PR0601CA0039.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:203:68::25) To VI1PR05MB5934.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:803:e1::23) authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=idosch@mellanox.com; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [77.138.249.209] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9b9efc6b-bc4f-450f-1555-08d6c7ac2f3a x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7193020);SRVR:VI1PR05MB3261; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR05MB3261: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-forefront-prvs: 0016DEFF96 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(7916004)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(346002)(376002)(199004)(189003)(6246003)(478600001)(186003)(81166006)(81156014)(305945005)(33716001)(6506007)(6916009)(71200400001)(107886003)(97736004)(53936002)(86362001)(26005)(386003)(8676002)(8936002)(256004)(4326008)(14454004)(66066001)(7736002)(71190400001)(2906002)(25786009)(6436002)(99286004)(4744005)(76176011)(52116002)(66446008)(66476007)(66556008)(66946007)(64756008)(33656002)(316002)(54906003)(486006)(73956011)(446003)(68736007)(476003)(3846002)(9686003)(102836004)(1076003)(6512007)(6116002)(5660300002)(229853002)(11346002)(6486002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:VI1PR05MB3261;H:VI1PR05MB5934.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;LANG:en;PTR:InfoNoRecords;A:1;MX:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: mellanox.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: fR5yJo4nVkK7Es174S0mOLdzY/6fV6UYbxHlxV+HcUVIUwCPGnc66iyqg/7LJ5vpvFRn8gSpZYOLgiUdK9f9VUdfiTCenAsbLGp4UvVsqXPnt5gpAJbJybGqewlXIsWqIHBdmBVDwDqfOa6ZFPY0Jcu/0kgKOGXpc1iiIbyBvLl6gbnOJOVRJjaSIFSq7lsO2/tdWugABhE7ETYqX5XoWxyWu9NVgGGpcw8fFZBoHnBDv2X835INfsNm3pljzjwuaASuG8xIS8/r7MNAKDluRfNjSiu6QwhEVD4HiEwrsfhU4NabGhxsTXffJwh1q/M2dC/Qoj9/iKsg+TyCnIme081FeAkpIu/ZflboAiLcV3dP8Ke8mY5pqj4R5py8mq577Je3Iv1xp72A/6qXO3BIIpz1wMaIEwr9COXl66SzjBU= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1BE84EE669F675409B2BA716DBE2C350@eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: Mellanox.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9b9efc6b-bc4f-450f-1555-08d6c7ac2f3a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Apr 2019 05:26:06.2753 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a652971c-7d2e-4d9b-a6a4-d149256f461b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR05MB3261 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 02:17:39PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Out of curiosity - are you guys considering adding CPU flavour ports, > or is there a good reason not to have it exposed? Yes, we are considering that. In fact, Alexander (Cc-ed) just asked me if it is possible to monitor the occupancy in the egress CPU pool. This is impossible without exposing the CPU port and it would have saved us a lot of time while debugging these issues. Do you need this functionality for nfp as well? If so, do you have any thoughts about it? My thinking is that it would be a devlink port without a backing netdev.