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 E67642E0C0 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2023 16:37:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15753C433C8; Thu, 15 Jun 2023 16:37:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1686847022; bh=4pkEOA2Mn4kkP71IDVqMx/ojRnn3oDH7NMze36U1neA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=t7Jw6aK8OF7+Z+eEn3Rt0r46AHduM+5BkK1+LsEiaQAAqGETpsTVJO7ORwCA5gJgF tcSAHi1RjhLPx6oEa1K/Nh+iDtt+AyW5qmWpKU0oRwtLw5etwU4+oHRYU5E1vQ2D+M HAwskZz8yvehPB+mFLCz4zTjsWmN0SOQ2T8ivCshca0YznPyC3779TAvLwcPfX4tPU La5i/BBHgQsKLacb4ZoFRYkuac2lmxa5r+dUZAhq4hp0yvIxzPnwK3a9hqqndYjShB E9CdDn6/yPDoUt0ISDvrGEGqBqS9KK3axXt0vkOivV/N9+L0lkzFntT3pKbZ9FjVEZ DIXxrOWdrVENA== Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 09:37:01 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Jiri Pirko Cc: Saeed Mahameed , Saeed Mahameed , "David S. Miller" , Paolo Abeni , Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan , Shay Drory , Moshe Shemesh Subject: Re: [net-next 14/15] net/mlx5: Light probe local SFs Message-ID: <20230615093701.20d0ad1b@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20230610014254.343576-1-saeed@kernel.org> <20230610014254.343576-15-saeed@kernel.org> <20230610000123.04c3a32f@kernel.org> <20230612105124.44c95b7c@kernel.org> <20230613190552.4e0cdbbf@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@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, 15 Jun 2023 12:51:09 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: > The problem is scalability. SFs could be activated in parallel, but the > cmd that is doing that holds devlink instance lock. That serializes it. > So we need to either: > 1) change the devlink locking to be able to execute some of the cmds in > parallel and leave the activation sync > 2) change the activation to be async and work with notifications > > I like 2) better, as the 1) maze we just got out of recently :) > WDYT? I guess we don't need to wait for the full activation. Is the port creation also async, then, or just the SF devlink instance creation?