Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/15][pull request] ice: support devlink subfunction

Tony Nguyen
2024-08-02T17:38:50Z

On 8/2/2024 12:35 AM, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 08:56:53AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 07:11:48AM CEST, michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 04:32:56PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>> Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 12:10:11AM CEST, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com wrote:
>>>>> Michal Swiatkowski says:
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently ice driver does not allow creating more than one networking
>>>>> device per physical function. The only way to have more hardware backed
>>>>> netdev is to use SR-IOV.
>>>>>
>>>>> Following patchset adds support for devlink port API. For each new
>>>>> pcisf type port, driver allocates new VSI, configures all resources
>>>>> needed, including dynamically MSIX vectors, program rules and registers
>>>>> new netdev.
>>>>>
>>>>> This series supports only one Tx/Rx queue pair per subfunction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example commands:
>>>>> devlink port add pci/0000:31:00.1 flavour pcisf pfnum 1 sfnum 1000
>>>>> devlink port function set pci/0000:31:00.1/1 hw_addr 00:00:00:00:03:14
>>>>> devlink port function set pci/0000:31:00.1/1 state active
>>>>> devlink port function del pci/0000:31:00.1/1
>>>>>
>>>>> Make the port representor and eswitch code generic to support
>>>>> subfunction representor type.
>>>>>
>>>>> VSI configuration is slightly different between VF and SF. It needs to
>>>>> be reflected in the code.
>>>>> ---
>>>>> v2:
>>>>> - Add more recipients
>>>>>
>>>>> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240729223431.681842-1-anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com/
>>>>
>>>> I'm confused a bit. This is certainly not v2. I replied to couple
>>>> versions before. There is no changelog. Hard to track changes :/
>>>
>>> You can see all changes here:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240606112503.1939759-1-michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com/
>>>
>>> This is pull request from Tony, no changes between it and version from
>>> iwl.
>>
>> Why the changelog can't be here too? It's still the same patchset, isn't
>> it?
>>
>
> Correct it is the same patchset. I don't know, I though it is normal
> that PR is starting from v1, feels like it was always like that.
> Probably Tony is better person to ask about the process here.

The previous patches were 'iwl-next', when we send to 'net-next' we
reset the versions since it's going to a new list.

Thanks,
Tony