From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920E8C10DCE for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:28:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF64206D7 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:28:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583530109; bh=O2etK/SY8vfFXaEqDy/bIMBEAzjmTE2D2rT0cjeLSjg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=Dvt2a5hn2DUw5dBX9yXkX4ejqQ4ZhBKqMtXhtH+/aMjsd5fffoGEjaE6zjpVrxYlj +gduxqZZI4TrbVf8jH87mRc6L7D2ds/JWrqTMDQEgc/CJ99fjg7ZsXBuEJv5YT0RIU MTXyvzseNwwWnQqu2Qq8oV35U51rDra2VQ+8N11Y= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726378AbgCFV22 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2020 16:28:28 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:45056 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726162AbgCFV22 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2020 16:28:28 -0500 Received: from kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN (unknown [163.114.132.128]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C25FE206D7; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:28:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583530108; bh=O2etK/SY8vfFXaEqDy/bIMBEAzjmTE2D2rT0cjeLSjg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=qlXxo4vTvWDKcOGgknZgNGTobUzFFW0Nqi6pvUdNPDfGtPrP1gfozJIq7fVYIFFyW uAOG53nQ1zogpBxTfxWdpss31OB7iw68ZkDoQzMRaT3srZ/ZHRSSi1mJWc50ssUepy q09BXDKmZalnJZeTKx2GqkrZsaP3fVBtP/Kukfsw= Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 13:28:25 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Shannon Nelson Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 7/8] ionic: add support for device id 0x1004 Message-ID: <20200306132825.2568127a@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> In-Reply-To: <5ac3562b-47b1-a684-c7f2-61da1a233859@pensando.io> References: <20200305052319.14682-1-snelson@pensando.io> <20200305052319.14682-8-snelson@pensando.io> <20200305140322.2dc86db0@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> <20200305171834.6c52b5e9@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> <3b85a630-8387-2dc6-2f8c-8543102d8572@pensando.io> <20200306102009.0817bb06@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> <5ac3562b-47b1-a684-c7f2-61da1a233859@pensando.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 12:32:51 -0800 Shannon Nelson wrote: > >> However, this device id does exist on some of the DSC configurations, > >> and I'd prefer to explicitly acknowledge its existence in the driver a= nd > >> perhaps keep better control over it, whether or not it gets used by our > >> 3rd party tool, rather than leave it as some obscure port for someone = to > >> "discover". =20 > > I understand, but disagree. Your driver can certainly bind to that > > management device but it has to be for the internal use of the kernel. > > You shouldn't just expose that FW interface right out to user space as > > a netdev. =20 >=20 > So for now the driver should simply capture and configure the PCI=20 > device, but stop at that point and not setup a netdev.=C2=A0 This would l= eave=20 > the device available for devlink commands. >=20 > If that sounds reasonable to you, I'll add it and respin the patchset. I presume the driver currently creates a devlink instance per PCI function? (Given we have no real infrastructure in place to combine them.) It still feels a little strange to have a devlink instance that doesn't represent any entity user would care about, but a communication channel. It'd be better if other functions made use of the communication channel behind the scene. That said AFAIU driver with just a devlink instance won't allow passing arbitrary commands, so that would indeed address my biggest concern. What operations would that devlink instance expose?