From: Saleem, Shiraz <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RESEND net] ice: Correctly deal with PFs that do not support RDMA
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 15:49:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4bc2664ac89844a79242339f5e971335@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YTsjDsFbBggL2X/8@unreal>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net] ice: Correctly deal with PFs that do not
> support RDMA
>
> On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 08:12:23AM -0700, Dave Ertman wrote:
> > There are two cases where the current PF does not support RDMA
> > functionality. The first is if the NVM loaded on the device is set to
> > not support RDMA (common_caps.rdma is false). The second is if the
> > kernel bonding driver has included the current PF in an active link
> > aggregate.
> >
> > When the driver has determined that this PF does not support RDMA,
> > then auxiliary devices should not be created on the auxiliary bus.
>
> This part is wrong, auxiliary devices should always be created, in your case it will
> be one eth device only without extra irdma device.
It is worth considering having an eth aux device/driver but is it a hard-and-fast rule?
In this case, the RDMA-capable PCI network device spawns an auxiliary device for RDMA
and the core driver is a network driver.
>
> Your "bug" is that you mixed auxiliary bus devices with "regular" ones and created
> eth device not as auxiliary one. This is why you are calling to auxiliary_device_init()
> for RDMA only and fallback to non-auxiliary mode.
It's a design choice on how you carve out function(s) off your PCI core device to be
managed by auxiliary driver(s) and not a bug.
Shiraz
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
"Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@intel.com>
Cc: "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"yongxin.liu@windriver.com" <yongxin.liu@windriver.com>,
"Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
"jgg@ziepe.ca" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Singhai, Anjali" <anjali.singhai@intel.com>,
"Parikh, Neerav" <neerav.parikh@intel.com>,
"Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH RESEND net] ice: Correctly deal with PFs that do not support RDMA
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 15:49:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4bc2664ac89844a79242339f5e971335@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YTsjDsFbBggL2X/8@unreal>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net] ice: Correctly deal with PFs that do not
> support RDMA
>
> On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 08:12:23AM -0700, Dave Ertman wrote:
> > There are two cases where the current PF does not support RDMA
> > functionality. The first is if the NVM loaded on the device is set to
> > not support RDMA (common_caps.rdma is false). The second is if the
> > kernel bonding driver has included the current PF in an active link
> > aggregate.
> >
> > When the driver has determined that this PF does not support RDMA,
> > then auxiliary devices should not be created on the auxiliary bus.
>
> This part is wrong, auxiliary devices should always be created, in your case it will
> be one eth device only without extra irdma device.
It is worth considering having an eth aux device/driver but is it a hard-and-fast rule?
In this case, the RDMA-capable PCI network device spawns an auxiliary device for RDMA
and the core driver is a network driver.
>
> Your "bug" is that you mixed auxiliary bus devices with "regular" ones and created
> eth device not as auxiliary one. This is why you are calling to auxiliary_device_init()
> for RDMA only and fallback to non-auxiliary mode.
It's a design choice on how you carve out function(s) off your PCI core device to be
managed by auxiliary driver(s) and not a bug.
Shiraz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-13 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-09 15:12 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RESEND net] ice: Correctly deal with PFs that do not support RDMA Dave Ertman
2021-09-09 15:12 ` Dave Ertman
2021-09-10 9:19 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-10 9:19 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-13 15:49 ` Saleem, Shiraz [this message]
2021-09-13 15:49 ` Saleem, Shiraz
2021-09-13 16:07 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Ertman, David M
2021-09-13 16:07 ` Ertman, David M
2021-09-14 3:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-14 3:16 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-14 3:10 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-14 3:10 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-24 14:10 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-09-24 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=4bc2664ac89844a79242339f5e971335@intel.com \
--to=shiraz.saleem@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/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.