From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: idosch@nvidia.com, petrm@nvidia.com, simon.horman@corigine.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, leonro@nvidia.com, jiri@resnulli.us
Subject: Re: [RFT net-next 0/6] devlink: expose instance locking and simplify port splitting
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 23:13:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yipp3sQewk9y0RVP@shredder> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yim9aIeF8oHG59tG@shredder>
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:57:17AM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 04:16:26PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > This series puts the devlink ports fully under the devlink instance
> > lock's protection. As discussed in the past it implements my preferred
> > solution of exposing the instance lock to the drivers. This way drivers
> > which want to support port splitting can lock the devlink instance
> > themselves on the probe path, and we can take that lock in the core
> > on the split/unsplit paths.
> >
> > nfp and mlxsw are converted, with slightly deeper changes done in
> > nfp since I'm more familiar with that driver.
> >
> > Now that the devlink port is protected we can pass a pointer to
> > the drivers, instead of passing a port index and forcing the drivers
> > to do their own lookups. Both nfp and mlxsw can container_of() to
> > their own structures.
> >
> > I'd appreciate some testing, I don't have access to this HW.
>
> Thanks for working on this. I ran a few tests that exercise these code
> paths with a debug config and did not see any immediate problems. I will
> go over the patches later today
Went over the patches and they look good to me. Thanks again. Will run a
full regression with them on Sunday.
I read [1] and [2] again to refresh my memory about this conversion. Can
you provide a rough outline of how you plan to go about it? Asking so
that I will know what to expect and how it all fits together. I expect
that eventually 'DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NO_LOCK' will be removed from
'DEVLINK_CMD_RELOAD' and then the devl_lock()/devl_unlock() that you
left in drivers will be moved to earlier in the probe path so that we
don't deadlock on reload.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YYgJ1bnECwUWvNqD@shredder/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20211030231254.2477599-1-kuba@kernel.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-10 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-10 0:16 [RFT net-next 0/6] devlink: expose instance locking and simplify port splitting Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 0:16 ` [RFT net-next 1/6] devlink: expose instance locking and add locked port registering Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 9:14 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-03-10 20:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-11 9:15 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-03-11 16:33 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-14 12:43 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-03-11 16:09 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-11 16:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-11 16:57 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-11 17:39 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-11 17:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-11 17:49 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-11 18:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-11 18:19 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-10 0:16 ` [RFT net-next 2/6] eth: nfp: wrap locking assertions in helpers Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 0:16 ` [RFT net-next 3/6] eth: nfp: replace driver's "pf" lock with devlink instance lock Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 0:16 ` [RFT net-next 4/6] eth: mlxsw: switch to explicit locking for port registration Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 9:17 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-03-10 20:08 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 0:16 ` [RFT net-next 5/6] devlink: hold the instance lock in port_split / port_unsplit callbacks Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 0:16 ` [RFT net-next 6/6] devlink: pass devlink_port to " Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-10 8:57 ` [RFT net-next 0/6] devlink: expose instance locking and simplify port splitting Ido Schimmel
2022-03-10 21:13 ` Ido Schimmel [this message]
2022-03-10 21:28 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-14 18:46 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-14 19:10 ` Ido Schimmel
2022-03-14 20:11 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-15 7:39 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-15 15:58 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-15 17:54 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-10 9:05 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-03-10 9:07 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-10 20:13 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-11 6:30 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-03-11 10:48 ` Simon Horman
2022-03-11 16:34 ` Jakub Kicinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Yipp3sQewk9y0RVP@shredder \
--to=idosch@idosch.org \
--cc=idosch@nvidia.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=leonro@nvidia.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=petrm@nvidia.com \
--cc=simon.horman@corigine.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).