Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] ath10k: use new module_firmware_crashed()
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-05-18 22:16:51
Also in:
linux-wireless, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2020-05-22 · Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] ath10k: use new module_firmware_crashed() · Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
- 2020-05-22 · Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] ath10k: use new module_firmware_crashed() · Emmanuel Grumbach <hidden>
- 2020-05-21 · Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] ath10k: use new module_firmware_crashed() · Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
- 2020-05-20 · Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] ath10k: use new module_firmware_crashed() · Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
- 2020-05-20 · Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] ath10k: use new module_firmware_crashed() · Emmanuel Grumbach <hidden>
On Mon, 18 May 2020 21:22:02 +0000 Luis Chamberlain wrote:
Indeed my issue with devlink is that it did not seem generic enough for all devices which use firmware and for which firmware can crash. Support should not have to be "add devlink support" + "now use this new hook", but rather a very lighweight devlink_crash(device) call we can sprinkly with only the device as a functional requirement.
We can provide a lightweight devlink_crash(device) which only generates the notification, without the need to register the health reporter or a devlink instance upfront. But then we loose the ability to control the recovery, count errors, etc. So I'd think that's not the direction we want to go in.