From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28A6519994F; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 01:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740534008; cv=none; b=Kme4QWEQNJAFSp+svlA7VufsnMhb6D3sWVpZgT2pR+GDmevdcdjhwzMO6h0Q9q+0gkpxnua/6bShyZgKLB2z6qe5J3IxRR4bfr17xggAcyHPe/SJ+BDAXd5eDx/2baJhRT/Ubikt08ZcxHJTCrYPAJHD84EVkrsCHI2dkJ8JLjA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740534008; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qgHwa1uTYGNlZs1FSdv5nNpP+wTaMz+y1Oe8SjywQLI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=GPtFExNRdXAM6ZCDM7pmZSPg1014UULUVHqC4eHHOGpukYbX3zl0kjR8gsU6adcvIZ4rruQ9sL8l1fwHihc6JlZLCEA8QwgcYgFgG3RAz5vqCEdkalo9lD+EBViQNqXvglfd3g38CsbqkoJVIIf6tef+Tw+ajYzHfMxRj2ywXLs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=uphFgnPo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="uphFgnPo" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABA80C4CEDD; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 01:40:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1740534007; bh=qgHwa1uTYGNlZs1FSdv5nNpP+wTaMz+y1Oe8SjywQLI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uphFgnPovfymgldeHUGro1jxgiPCTC0ckwkZ5B7XmddbxY5yJh5GGb7Y0ma8C/+Fc 2jH+Bd2/9aucGnV0bcNFpIA3y/8eJMNmoVXmNV70xoWkHr19Ht0a/PMIAk/gMDcUpS ejjI5yMWLqLv5FmElWjcYfHW5dDMo3k4HuOKW3ahHdadE4m9pUzugGnfqlX2FSkqL3 +KkcUmSFiODbvsQM2rFhaW78kTqVkurJjK5k6DfOt/7AHvX2Ery5+0Gqf3JjQBHjOs PIcMUFZ+anoAuQQvvnJ0/QvxMGnSAo6d5CtAOc0/TscpSYOPf6IidRp6DkByEThdQR BHglpIkEsIBAQ== Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 17:40:05 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Jiri Pirko Cc: Tariq Toukan , "David S. Miller" , Paolo Abeni , Eric Dumazet , Andrew Lunn , Jiri Pirko , Cosmin Ratiu , Carolina Jubran , Gal Pressman , Mark Bloch , Donald Hunter , Jonathan Corbet , Saeed Mahameed , Leon Romanovsky , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 03/10] devlink: Serialize access to rate domains Message-ID: <20250225174005.189f048d@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20250213180134.323929-1-tariqt@nvidia.com> <20250213180134.323929-4-tariqt@nvidia.com> <20250218182130.757cc582@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 14:36:07 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote: > >The problem comes from having a devlink instance per function / > >port rather than for the ASIC. Spawn a single instance and the > >problem will go away =F0=9F=A4=B7=EF=B8=8F =20 >=20 > Yeah, we currently have VF devlink ports created under PF devlink instanc= e. > That is aligned with PCI geometry. If we have a single per-ASIC parent > devlink, this does not change and we still need to configure cross > PF devlink instances. Why would there still be PF instances? I'm not suggesting that you create a hierarchy of instances. > The only benefit I see is that we don't need rate domain, but > we can use parent devlink instance lock instead. The locking ordering > might be a bit tricky to fix though.