Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] sfc: add devlink support for ef100

[Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>]

On 1/24/2023 3:05 AM, Lucero Palau, Alejandro wrote:
> 
> On 1/19/23 23:40, Jacob Keller wrote:
>>
>> On 1/19/2023 3:31 AM, alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com wrote:
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_FW_MGMT_SUC	"fw.mgmt.suc"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_FW_MGMT_CMC	"fw.mgmt.cmc"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_FPGA_REV	"fpga.rev"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_DATAPATH_HW	"fpga.app"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_DATAPATH_FW	DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_GENERIC_FW_APP
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_SOC_BOOT	"coproc.boot"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_SOC_UBOOT	"coproc.uboot"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_SOC_MAIN	"coproc.main"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_SOC_RECOVERY	"coproc.recovery"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_FW_EXPROM	"fw.exprom"
>>> +#define EFX_DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_FW_UEFI	"fw.uefi"
>> Here, you've defined several new versions, only one of which is
>> standard. I don't see an associated documentation addition. Please add a
>> ef100.rst file to Documentation/networking/devlink
>>
>> It is also preferred to use the standard names or extend the set of
>> standard names where appropriate first. Can you explain why you didn't
>> do that here?
>>
>> For example, the documentation for "fw.undi" indicates it may include
>> the UEFI driver, and I would expect your UEFI version to be something
>> like fw.undi or fw.undi.uefi if its distinct...
> 
> 
> I'm adding the doc file for v2.
> 
> About uefi/undi, we have uefi but not undi.
>

I believe this is the same as ice, and we still used fw.undi. From the doc:

UNDI software, may include the UEFI driver, firmware or both.

Basically whether it includes the UEFI driver, firmware, or both it
should still be fw.undi, and i would expect if you really must
separately version the components those would need sub-fields added to
the devlink-info.rst