All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
	Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] e1000e: ethtool: add get_channels support
Date: Mon, 4 May 2026 18:26:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260504182635.39e1b7a6@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D670011F-AA11-4AFF-A70B-4DFF03C5F049@nutanix.com>

On Tue, 5 May 2026 01:12:29 +0000 Jon Kohler wrote:
> > On May 4, 2026, at 9:06 PM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 5 May 2026 00:59:40 +0000 Jon Kohler wrote:  
>  [...]  
>  [...]  
>  [...]  
> >> 
> >> Perhaps, but I’m not sure that is a guarantee. A good relevant example
> >> is when I added get_channels support to enic, which supports all sorts
> >> of channels, so I don’t think EOPNOTSUP can be 100% consider reliable
> >> in that case. Meaning, if it just so happens that the original author(s)
> >> didn't put in get_channels, that doesn’t necessarily mean there is only
> >> one queue.
> >> 
> >> And in this case, there is an "other" queue as as well too, as far as
> >> I can tell, so the output is at least semi-interesting.  
> > 
> > Sorry I wasn't clear enough - if you have an actual, real life use case
> > why you need queue count of 1 to be explicitly reported - please explain
> > it and put it in the commit message.
> > 
> > If you don't - please don't send patches for the sake of it.  
> 
> Ah, ok, sorry I misread your message, this isn’t a patch for the sake of
> a patch. Long story short, we’ve got a user space part of our control plane
> that reads in the output of ethtool -l as part of some broader queue
> management code. On systems with an e1000e device present, this specific
> component goes into a crash loop as it expects all NIC(s) to at least
> give it some sort of output.
> 
> That crash loop is easy enough to fix to ignore unsupported outputs;
> however, my thought here is a simply defense in depth fixup, especially
> since the kernel patch is quite trivial.

Got it, thanks for explaining.

My concern is that if we are expected to always report channel counts
we're signing up for a major whack-a-mole with the existing drivers.
Most drivers don't implement it. The networking stack does report
the number of queues the device asked for via rtnetlink:

ip -j -d li show dev $ifc | jq '.[].num_rx_queues'

but in your case I'd personally lean towards user space fix.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
	Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] e1000e: ethtool: add get_channels support
Date: Mon, 4 May 2026 18:26:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260504182635.39e1b7a6@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D670011F-AA11-4AFF-A70B-4DFF03C5F049@nutanix.com>

On Tue, 5 May 2026 01:12:29 +0000 Jon Kohler wrote:
> > On May 4, 2026, at 9:06 PM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 5 May 2026 00:59:40 +0000 Jon Kohler wrote:  
>  [...]  
>  [...]  
>  [...]  
> >> 
> >> Perhaps, but I’m not sure that is a guarantee. A good relevant example
> >> is when I added get_channels support to enic, which supports all sorts
> >> of channels, so I don’t think EOPNOTSUP can be 100% consider reliable
> >> in that case. Meaning, if it just so happens that the original author(s)
> >> didn't put in get_channels, that doesn’t necessarily mean there is only
> >> one queue.
> >> 
> >> And in this case, there is an "other" queue as as well too, as far as
> >> I can tell, so the output is at least semi-interesting.  
> > 
> > Sorry I wasn't clear enough - if you have an actual, real life use case
> > why you need queue count of 1 to be explicitly reported - please explain
> > it and put it in the commit message.
> > 
> > If you don't - please don't send patches for the sake of it.  
> 
> Ah, ok, sorry I misread your message, this isn’t a patch for the sake of
> a patch. Long story short, we’ve got a user space part of our control plane
> that reads in the output of ethtool -l as part of some broader queue
> management code. On systems with an e1000e device present, this specific
> component goes into a crash loop as it expects all NIC(s) to at least
> give it some sort of output.
> 
> That crash loop is easy enough to fix to ignore unsupported outputs;
> however, my thought here is a simply defense in depth fixup, especially
> since the kernel patch is quite trivial.

Got it, thanks for explaining.

My concern is that if we are expected to always report channel counts
we're signing up for a major whack-a-mole with the existing drivers.
Most drivers don't implement it. The networking stack does report
the number of queues the device asked for via rtnetlink:

ip -j -d li show dev $ifc | jq '.[].num_rx_queues'

but in your case I'd personally lean towards user space fix.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-05  1:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-04 15:48 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] e1000e: ethtool: add get_channels support Jon Kohler
2026-05-04 15:48 ` Jon Kohler
2026-05-04 17:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2026-05-04 17:41   ` Joe Damato
2026-05-04 23:49 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-04 23:49   ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-05  0:59   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jon Kohler
2026-05-05  0:59     ` Jon Kohler
2026-05-05  1:06     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-05  1:06       ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-05  1:12       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jon Kohler
2026-05-05  1:12         ` Jon Kohler
2026-05-05  1:26         ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-05-05  1:26           ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-07 23:49           ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jacob Keller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260504182635.39e1b7a6@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jon@nutanix.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.