From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [net-next 04/14] i40e: dump VF information in debugfs Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 11:51:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20170420.115153.1510206006505486594.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20170420113942.GD1886@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jiri@resnulli.us, gerlitz.or@gmail.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, mitch.a.williams@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, nhorman@redhat.com, sassmann@redhat.com, jogreene@redhat.com To: Yuval.Mintz@cavium.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:44422 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S970689AbdDTPvz (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2017 11:51:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: "Mintz, Yuval" Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 13:57:08 +0000 > I agree this surely isn't *our* convention, but for scsi using debugfs > [or sysfs] is a common practice for debug purposes. > > Also, our HW debug capabilities are highly-customable, and I want to > have the ability to configure those on the fly [E.g., dynamically > configuring various HW events to be recorded]. > Each such configuration involves multiple register writes and reads > according to user provided inputs. > I don't really see how to generalize the information collection in a way > that would benefit anyone else. That's basically what everyone says who slaps random crap into debugfs. >> For your inhouse debugging, you should have oot >> patch to expose whatever you need. > > I don't want in-house debugging capabilities - > I want field debug capabilities. Then it has to use a portable, well defined, set of interfaces.