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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 9E66EC3524D for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 17:46:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7890020674 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 17:46:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=broadcom.com header.i=@broadcom.com header.b="EMGUhIk+" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727502AbgBDRqw (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 12:46:52 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com ([209.85.221.48]:33302 "EHLO mail-wr1-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727443AbgBDRqv (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 12:46:51 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id u6so10920184wrt.0 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 09:46:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PViOF49b8qn6ahEHi/SP9r5V6sh5UEmUDNaREM4YCcQ=; b=EMGUhIk+XjYOFFJ3c9Yw3ZqrdR9DZ0pwnH3NWzXLRrAB1X9+yUtTC0xYli0RVOF9gH fJJymtOT/mru9YC5at4CF4sfyHeKhH/YwKp3e5LIAxYoyBDzgr07fDgtxFFNlsOtGo8i gDTm+xUVbltGFTGL/Fsr1govVdyfisDPy4OX0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=PViOF49b8qn6ahEHi/SP9r5V6sh5UEmUDNaREM4YCcQ=; b=TdjkVP5PloaRukll30WB0Q7+xJTO4fjC6FOJxjF66e08tYgq64fLqdU+vTXcRsxG7T Qd+rlwxnC6aBsX/0kki+j+Rc1UKCNPZwT+NG6cJf06tKOK5Iu3XJdriNgyjOV5gN9wMl J9WqwRcatum9p1GJpU+dsOC7KDzNAWzerD0m+8dtkQgPlUsGPSij7TNgA1jQyUGRxcLB x+1odE5SSybNIgn94Uwps88Fwea0uQcCj9A6feaNRg2OsM5wkT2cIbRXFKYXNaqbLfrL eKQ/3kdC7K8qxJIPcd0DWJ0Mlwbnc/7+qNu4KsCM1rH/t7F/+Op5JtZC1d1Xrs+dogxg pzig== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXLT+WmdK9VdhJW4yLhGZz738gootCuN/9eosCLM1YRjt1wJ9or FS3mcHai60MemiWuLf37+jrksg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz/5K1UcEofQ7ReFArUC3/pSsCxsk1ESNnijG4XViMGDX+qWejI4E6tiwr2otz0ieBIzUMe4g== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:65cf:: with SMTP id e15mr22722363wrw.126.1580838409275; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 09:46:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from rj-aorus.ric.broadcom.com ([192.19.228.250]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z8sm30866368wrq.22.2020.02.04.09.46.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Feb 2020 09:46:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: RFC: Use of devlink/health report for non-Ethernet devices To: Jiri Pirko Cc: Jiri Pirko , "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , BCM Kernel Feedback References: <20200204064854.GK2260@nanopsycho> From: Ray Jui Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 09:46:44 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200204064854.GK2260@nanopsycho> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Hi Jiri, On 2020-02-03 10:48 p.m., Jiri Pirko wrote: > Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 12:01:37AM CET, ray.jui@broadcom.com wrote: >> Hi Jiri/Eran/David, >> >> I've been investigating the health report feature of devlink, and have a >> couple related questions as follows: >> >> 1. Based on my investigation, it seems that devlink health report mechanism >> provides the hook for a device driver to report errors, dump debug >> information, trigger object dump, initiate self-recovery, and etc. The >> current users of health report are all Ethernet based drivers. However, it >> does not seem the health report framework prohibits the use from any >> non-Ethernet based device drivers. Is my understanding correct? > > The whole devlink framework is designed to be independent on > ethernet/networking. > > Great. This is what I thought it is. Thanks for confirming. >> >> 2. Following my first question, in this case, do you think it makes any sense >> to use devlink health report as a generic error reporting and recovery >> mechanism, for other devices, e.g., NVMe and Virt I/O? > > Sure. > > Thanks. >> >> 3. In the Ethernet device driver based use case, if one has a "smart NIC" >> type of platform, i.e., running Linux on the embedded processor of the NIC, >> it seems to make a lot of sense to also use devlink health report to deal >> with other non-Ethernet specific errors, originated from the embedded Linux >> (or any other OSes). The front-end driver that registers various health >> reporters will still be an Ethernet based device driver, running on the host >> server system. Does this make sense to you? > > Should not be ethetnet based driver. You should create the devlink > instance in a driver for the particular device you want to report > the health for. > > Okay thanks! >> >> Thanks in advance for your feedback! >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ray >> >>