Re: [PATCH 11/15] RDMA/hbl: add habanalabs RDMA driver

Leon Romanovsky
2024-06-17T19:04:34Z

On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 05:43:49PM +0000, Omer Shpigelman wrote:
> On 6/13/24 22:18, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > [Some people who received this message don't often get email from leon@kernel.org. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:22:04AM +0300, Omer Shpigelman wrote:
> >> Add an RDMA driver of Gaudi ASICs family for AI scaling.
> >> The driver itself is agnostic to the ASIC in action, it operates according
> >> to the capabilities that were passed on device initialization.
> >> The device is initialized by the hbl_cn driver via auxiliary bus.
> >> The driver also supports QP resource tracking and port/device HW counters.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Omer Shpigelman <oshpigelman@habana.ai>
> >> Co-developed-by: Abhilash K V <kvabhilash@habana.ai>
> >> Signed-off-by: Abhilash K V <kvabhilash@habana.ai>
> >> Co-developed-by: Andrey Agranovich <aagranovich@habana.ai>
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrey Agranovich <aagranovich@habana.ai>
> >> Co-developed-by: Bharat Jauhari <bjauhari@habana.ai>
> >> Signed-off-by: Bharat Jauhari <bjauhari@habana.ai>
> >> Co-developed-by: David Meriin <dmeriin@habana.ai>
> >> Signed-off-by: David Meriin <dmeriin@habana.ai>
> >> Co-developed-by: Sagiv Ozeri <sozeri@habana.ai>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sagiv Ozeri <sozeri@habana.ai>
> >> Co-developed-by: Zvika Yehudai <zyehudai@habana.ai>
> >> Signed-off-by: Zvika Yehudai <zyehudai@habana.ai>
> >
> > I afraid that you misinterpreted the "Co-developed-by" tag. All these
> > people are probably touch the code and not actually sit together at
> > the same room and write the code together. So, please remove the
> > extensive "Co-developed-by" tags.
> >
> > It is not full review yet, but simple pass-by-comments.
> >
>
> Actually except of two, all of the mentioned persons sat in the same room
> and developed the code together.
> The remaining two are located on a different site (but also together).
> Isn't that what "Co-developed-by" tag for?
> I wanted to give them credit for writing the code but I can remove if it's
> not common.

Signed-off-by will be enough to give them credit.

>
> >> ---
> >> MAINTAINERS | 10 +
> >> drivers/infiniband/Kconfig | 1 +
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/Makefile | 1 +
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/Kconfig | 17 +
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/Makefile | 8 +
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/hbl.h | 326 +++
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/hbl_main.c | 478 ++++
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/hbl_verbs.c | 2686 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> include/uapi/rdma/hbl-abi.h | 204 ++
> >> include/uapi/rdma/hbl_user_ioctl_cmds.h | 66 +
> >> include/uapi/rdma/hbl_user_ioctl_verbs.h | 106 +
> >> include/uapi/rdma/ib_user_ioctl_verbs.h | 1 +
> >> 12 files changed, 3904 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/Kconfig
> >> create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/Makefile
> >> create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/hbl.h
> >> create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/hbl_main.c
> >> create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/hbl/hbl_verbs.c
> >> create mode 100644 include/uapi/rdma/hbl-abi.h
> >> create mode 100644 include/uapi/rdma/hbl_user_ioctl_cmds.h
> >> create mode 100644 include/uapi/rdma/hbl_user_ioctl_verbs.h
> >
> > <...>
> >
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_emerg(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_emerg(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_alert(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_alert(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_crit(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_crit(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_err(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_err(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_warn(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_warn(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_notice(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_notice(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_info(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_info(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_dbg(ibdev, format, ...) ibdev_dbg(ibdev, format, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_emerg_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_emerg_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_alert_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_alert_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_crit_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_crit_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_err_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_err_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_warn_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_warn_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_notice_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_notice_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_info_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_info_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +#define hbl_ibdev_dbg_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ...) \
> >> + ibdev_dbg_ratelimited(ibdev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >> +
> >
> > Please don't redefine the existing macros. Just use the existing ones.
> >
> >
> > <...>
> >
>
> That's a leftover from some debug code. I'll remove.
>
> >> + if (hbl_ib_match_netdev(ibdev, netdev))
> >> + ib_port = hbl_to_ib_port_num(hdev, netdev->dev_port);
> >> + else
> >> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >
> > It is not kernel coding style. Please write:
> > if (!hbl_ib_match_netdev(ibdev, netdev))
> > return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >
> > ib_port = hbl_to_ib_port_num(hdev, netdev->dev_port);
> >
>
> I'll fix the code, thanks.
>
> >> +
> >
> > <...>
> >
> >> +static int hbl_ib_probe(struct auxiliary_device *adev, const struct auxiliary_device_id *id)
> >> +{
> >> + struct hbl_aux_dev *aux_dev = container_of(adev, struct hbl_aux_dev, adev);
> >> + struct hbl_ib_aux_ops *aux_ops = aux_dev->aux_ops;
> >> + struct hbl_ib_device *hdev;
> >> + ktime_t timeout;
> >> + int rc;
> >> +
> >> + rc = hdev_init(aux_dev);
> >> + if (rc) {
> >> + dev_err(&aux_dev->adev.dev, "Failed to init hdev\n");
> >> + return -EIO;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + hdev = aux_dev->priv;
> >> +
> >> + /* don't allow module unloading while it is attached */
> >> + if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE)) {
> >
> > This part makes wonder, what are you trying to do here? What doesn't work for you
> > in standard driver core and module load mechanism?
> >
>
> Before auxiliary bus was introduced, we used EXPORT_SYMBOLs for inter
> driver communication. That incremented the refcount of the used module so
> it couldn't be removed while it is in use.
> Auxiliary bus usage doesn't increment the used module refcount and hence
> the used module can be removed while it is in use and that's something
> we don't want to allow.
> We could solve it by some global locking or in_use atomic but the most
> simple and clean way is just to increment the used module refcount on
> auxiliary device probe and decrement it on auxiliary device removal.

No, you was supposed to continue to use EXPORT_SYMBOLs and don't
invent auxiliary ops structure (this is why you lost module
reference counting).

>
> >> + dev_err(hdev->dev, "Failed to increment %s module refcount\n",
> >> + module_name(THIS_MODULE));
> >> + rc = -EIO;
> >> + goto module_get_err;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + timeout = ktime_add_ms(ktime_get(), hdev->pending_reset_long_timeout * MSEC_PER_SEC);
> >> + while (1) {
> >> + aux_ops->hw_access_lock(aux_dev);
> >> +
> >> + /* if the device is operational, proceed to actual init while holding the lock in
> >> + * order to prevent concurrent hard reset
> >> + */
> >> + if (aux_ops->device_operational(aux_dev))
> >> + break;
> >> +
> >> + aux_ops->hw_access_unlock(aux_dev);
> >> +
> >> + if (ktime_compare(ktime_get(), timeout) > 0) {
> >> + dev_err(hdev->dev, "Timeout while waiting for hard reset to finish\n");
> >> + rc = -EBUSY;
> >> + goto timeout_err;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + dev_notice_once(hdev->dev, "Waiting for hard reset to finish before probing IB\n");
> >> +
> >> + msleep_interruptible(MSEC_PER_SEC);
> >> + }
> >
> > The code above is unexpected.
> >
>
> We have no control on when the user insmod the IB driver.

It is not true, this is controlled through module dependencies
mechanism.

> As a result it is possible that the IB auxiliary device will be probed
> while the compute device is under reset (due to some HW error).

No, it is not possible. If you structure your driver right.

Thanks