Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v4 4/5] ice: Add tx_scheduling_layers devlink param

[Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 10:45:01 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Jiri, I'm not aware of any other devices with this sort of trade off.
>> We shouldn't add the param if either:
>>  - this can be changed dynamically as user instantiates rate limiters;
>>  - we know other devices have similar needs.
>> If neither of those is true, param seems fine to me..  
> 
> Where is this policy documented? If not, could you please? Let's make
> this policy clear for now and for the future.

Because you think it's good as a policy or because not so much?
Both of the points are a judgment call, at least from upstream
perspective since we're working with very limited information.
So enshrining this as a "policy" is not very practical.

Do you recall any specific param that got rejected from mlx5?
Y'all were allowed to add the eq sizing params, which I think
is not going to be mlx5-only for long. Otherwise I only remember
cases where I'd try to push people to use the resource API, which
IMO is better for setting limits and delegating resources.