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 589753314AC; Fri, 8 May 2026 23:22:15 +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=1778282535; cv=none; b=NKL+W+hBRbynAjiHNNRIJa+hKyiWXX36mtc55Qu6WIuJWaUeaTwHTXOnwf89bueBQr1QNgCGxYOYQVnhEmN1Tzo5uPGfkBEuC7TxWydZAe8o2bU8/aJf9Za3/bgit+e6GFvfLeW4o6cCxR6Gb6dOr/4UsTnefn5mhY+JgzORMOw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778282535; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2AevTr3shap19RUwMMlENTSD4YYHTePzbIvM0R5o1lo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dCiDY0JiYI0unbWFx15mS6GTnMXm6nor8iuEG6FgPEOFAwWz8lpjatFLdUVq5+us727D+fv0A1OJvAHhQH4Zv18qn8+Ai5pIXrpuoa8qci+2FhvAAs7JRLf7u95Jfjhjq+cgWdreWQjQQh6Bu95uqzDLSd69v9eO5GKh06n4MNU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=U006x1Qi; 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="U006x1Qi" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DAAAC2BCB0; Fri, 8 May 2026 23:22:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1778282535; bh=2AevTr3shap19RUwMMlENTSD4YYHTePzbIvM0R5o1lo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=U006x1Qi5eQV8i9yrksMub0wobOaVX5RjUJq+keDQ64c+l16x5WSvWiE4KFcC/+vJ roHBlJI3OkPAJJA39d2ejeHLi0IISw5fbcqZccAwDh7PRzjRDwWyeENAZvGeaMsclr RPDbwOtvr6Wv2cyXplNKOlJw1UdcYSp88opgx/WQ+rpBrJ9uJSiXthYLwMtnqzR3RU OCBYCis4bgVvbE1Pufq5fptFH6tEj1GmoT2/x/dMCB0lwB94aDGGR/mwMnWbWO0Ddb vKU6yPeBieS4Y1flyyZjEQ8dztxlSJwdSabxUL/iJqKYO6aic98zhe8C4Kdb7VGmsM J/SLZDHVmTz6w== Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 16:22:13 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Daniel Machon Cc: Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Steen Hegelund , , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Clark Williams , "Steven Rostedt" , Bjarni Jonasson , Lars Povlsen , Philipp Zabel , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 1/4] net: sparx5: defer VCAP debugfs creation until after netdev registration Message-ID: <20260508162213.6b755d8c@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260507184714.joyobsh6ydjzrkc4@DEN-DL-M70577.microsemi.net> References: <20260506-misc-fixes-sparx5-lan969x-v2-0-fb236aa96908@microchip.com> <20260506-misc-fixes-sparx5-lan969x-v2-1-fb236aa96908@microchip.com> <20260507090810.53e66ef6@kernel.org> <20260507184714.joyobsh6ydjzrkc4@DEN-DL-M70577.microsemi.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 7 May 2026 20:47:14 +0200 Daniel Machon wrote: > > On Wed, 6 May 2026 09:25:36 +0200 Daniel Machon wrote: > > > Move the debugfs setup into a new sparx5_debugfs() helper in > > > sparx5_debugfs.c, invoked after sparx5_register_notifier_blocks() > > > succeeds so the netdev names are finalized. sparx5_vcap_init() now > > > only deals with VCAP state. The sparx5/ debugfs root is created in > > > the new helper as well. > > > > netdev names are never final :( User can change them at any time. > > The best practice is to name the debugfs file by some stable hw-related > > property, bus, port number etc. > > Right, but they are finalized in the sense that we have a name we can use for the > debugfs files (which we dont pre-patch). > > Hmm. I think this patch fixes an actual issue, where you cannot query the > debugfs files, because a previous patch broke the ordering. I agree that the > names chosen (netdev_name()) for the files were poor, but is that really a fix > for this series? Should that not be adressed in a future patch for net-next (it > involves changing an VCAP API function that is not only used by Sparx5/lan969x, > but also lan966x.). Dunno, if we are aiming to switch to a different naming scheme we can just do it now, I reckon. It will not make the fix much longer. And presumably it will alleviate the need to reshuffle the ordering.