A user optionally provides the external controller number when user
wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
An example on eswitch system:
$ devlink dev eswitch set pci/0033:01:00.0 mode switchdev
$ devlink port show
pci/0033:01:00.0/196607: type eth netdev enP51p1s0f0np0 flavour physical port 0 splittable false
$ devlink port add pci/0033:01:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 77 controller 1
pci/0033:01:00.0/163840: type eth netdev eth0 flavour pcisf controller 1 pfnum 0 sfnum 77 external true splittable false
function:
hw_addr 00:00:00:00:00:00 state inactive opstate detached
Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <redacted>
---
devlink/devlink.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
man/man8/devlink-port.8 | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
@@ -3795,7 +3806,7 @@ static void cmd_port_help(void)pr_err(" devlink port param set DEV/PORT_INDEX name PARAMETER value VALUE cmode { permanent | driverinit | runtime }\n");pr_err(" devlink port param show [DEV/PORT_INDEX name PARAMETER]\n");pr_err(" devlink port health show [ DEV/PORT_INDEX reporter REPORTER_NAME ]\n");-pr_err(" devlink port add DEV/PORT_INDEX flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ]\n");+pr_err(" devlink port add DEV/PORT_INDEX flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ] [ controller CNUM ]\n");pr_err(" devlink port del DEV/PORT_INDEX\n");}
@@ -4324,7 +4335,7 @@ static int __cmd_health_show(struct dl *dl, bool show_device, bool show_port);staticvoidcmd_port_add_help(void){-pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ]\n");+pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ] [ controller CNUM ]\n");}staticintcmd_port_add(structdl*dl)
@@ -4342,7 +4353,7 @@ static int cmd_port_add(struct dl *dl)err=dl_argv_parse_put(nlh,dl,DL_OPT_HANDLE|DL_OPT_HANDLEP|DL_OPT_PORT_FLAVOUR|DL_OPT_PORT_PFNUMBER,-DL_OPT_PORT_SFNUMBER);+DL_OPT_PORT_SFNUMBER|DL_OPT_PORT_CONTROLLER);if(err)returnerr;
@@ -174,6 +176,12 @@ Specifies sfnumber to assign to the device of the SF. This field is optional for those devices which supports auto assignment of the SF number.+.TP+.BRcontroller" { "controller" } "+Specifies controller number for which the SF port is created.+This field is optional. It is used only when SF port is created for the+external controller.+ .ti-8 .SSdevlinkportfunctionset-Settheportfunctionattribute(s).
@@ -327,6 +335,17 @@ devlink dev param set pci/0000:01:00.0/1 name internal_error_reset value true cm .RS4 Sets the parameter internal_error_reset of specified devlink port (#1) to true. .RE+.PP+devlink port add pci/0000:06:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 88 controller 1+.RS4+Add a devlink port of flavour PCI SF on controller 1 which has PCI PF of number+0 with SF number 88. To make use of the function an example sequence is to add+a port, configure the function attribute and activate the function. Once+the function usage is completed, deactivate the function and finally delete+the port. When there is desire to reuse the port without deletion, it can be+reconfigured and activated again when function is in inactive state and+function's operational state is detached.+.RE .SHSEEALSO .BRdevlink(8),
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-04 01:34:38
On 2021/6/3 19:19, Parav Pandit wrote:
A user optionally provides the external controller number when user
wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
Hi, Parav
I was planing to use controller id to solve the devlink
instance representing problem for multi-function which shares
common resource in the same ASIC, see [1].
It seems the controller id used here is to differentiate the
function used in different host?
1. https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/5/31/296
quoted hunk
An example on eswitch system:
$ devlink dev eswitch set pci/0033:01:00.0 mode switchdev
$ devlink port show
pci/0033:01:00.0/196607: type eth netdev enP51p1s0f0np0 flavour physical port 0 splittable false
$ devlink port add pci/0033:01:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 77 controller 1
pci/0033:01:00.0/163840: type eth netdev eth0 flavour pcisf controller 1 pfnum 0 sfnum 77 external true splittable false
function:
hw_addr 00:00:00:00:00:00 state inactive opstate detached
Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <redacted>
---
devlink/devlink.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
man/man8/devlink-port.8 | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
@@ -3795,7 +3806,7 @@ static void cmd_port_help(void)pr_err(" devlink port param set DEV/PORT_INDEX name PARAMETER value VALUE cmode { permanent | driverinit | runtime }\n");pr_err(" devlink port param show [DEV/PORT_INDEX name PARAMETER]\n");pr_err(" devlink port health show [ DEV/PORT_INDEX reporter REPORTER_NAME ]\n");-pr_err(" devlink port add DEV/PORT_INDEX flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ]\n");+pr_err(" devlink port add DEV/PORT_INDEX flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ] [ controller CNUM ]\n");pr_err(" devlink port del DEV/PORT_INDEX\n");}
@@ -4324,7 +4335,7 @@ static int __cmd_health_show(struct dl *dl, bool show_device, bool show_port);staticvoidcmd_port_add_help(void){-pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ]\n");+pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ] [ controller CNUM ]\n");}staticintcmd_port_add(structdl*dl)
@@ -4342,7 +4353,7 @@ static int cmd_port_add(struct dl *dl)err=dl_argv_parse_put(nlh,dl,DL_OPT_HANDLE|DL_OPT_HANDLEP|DL_OPT_PORT_FLAVOUR|DL_OPT_PORT_PFNUMBER,-DL_OPT_PORT_SFNUMBER);+DL_OPT_PORT_SFNUMBER|DL_OPT_PORT_CONTROLLER);if(err)returnerr;
@@ -174,6 +176,12 @@ Specifies sfnumber to assign to the device of the SF. This field is optional for those devices which supports auto assignment of the SF number.+.TP+.BRcontroller" { "controller" } "+Specifies controller number for which the SF port is created.+This field is optional. It is used only when SF port is created for the+external controller.+ .ti-8 .SSdevlinkportfunctionset-Settheportfunctionattribute(s).
@@ -327,6 +335,17 @@ devlink dev param set pci/0000:01:00.0/1 name internal_error_reset value true cm .RS4 Sets the parameter internal_error_reset of specified devlink port (#1) to true. .RE+.PP+devlink port add pci/0000:06:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 88 controller 1+.RS4+Add a devlink port of flavour PCI SF on controller 1 which has PCI PF of number+0 with SF number 88. To make use of the function an example sequence is to add+a port, configure the function attribute and activate the function. Once+the function usage is completed, deactivate the function and finally delete+the port. When there is desire to reuse the port without deletion, it can be+reconfigured and activated again when function is in inactive state and+function's operational state is detached.+.RE .SHSEEALSO .BRdevlink(8),
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 7:05 AM
On 2021/6/3 19:19, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
A user optionally provides the external controller number when user
wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
Hi, Parav
I was planing to use controller id to solve the devlink instance representing
problem for multi-function which shares common resource in the same ASIC,
see [1].
It seems the controller id used here is to differentiate the function used in
different host?
That’s correct. Controller holds one or more PCI functions (PF,VF,SF).
In your case if there is single devlink instance representing ASIC, it is better to have health reporters under this single instance.
Devlink parameters do not span multiple devlink instance.
So if you need to control devlink instance parameters of each function byitself, you likely need devlink instance for each.
And still continue to have ASIC wide health reporters under single instance that represents whole ASIC.
An example on eswitch system:
$ devlink dev eswitch set pci/0033:01:00.0 mode switchdev
$ devlink port show
pci/0033:01:00.0/196607: type eth netdev enP51p1s0f0np0 flavour
physical port 0 splittable false
$ devlink port add pci/0033:01:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 77
controller 1
pci/0033:01:00.0/163840: type eth netdev eth0 flavour pcisf controller 1
@@ -174,6 +176,12 @@ Specifies sfnumber to assign to the device of the
SF.
quoted
This field is optional for those devices which supports auto
assignment of the SF number.
+.TP
+.BR controller " { " controller " } "
+Specifies controller number for which the SF port is created.
+This field is optional. It is used only when SF port is created for
+the external controller.
+
.ti -8
.SS devlink port function set - Set the port function attribute(s).
@@ -327,6 +335,17 @@ devlink dev param set pci/0000:01:00.0/1 name
internal_error_reset value true cm .RS 4 Sets the parameter
internal_error_reset of specified devlink port (#1) to true.
.RE
+.PP
+devlink port add pci/0000:06:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 88
+controller 1 .RS 4 Add a devlink port of flavour PCI SF on controller
+1 which has PCI PF of number
+0 with SF number 88. To make use of the function an example sequence
+is to add a port, configure the function attribute and activate the
+function. Once the function usage is completed, deactivate the
+function and finally delete the port. When there is desire to reuse
+the port without deletion, it can be reconfigured and activated again
+when function is in inactive state and function's operational state is
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-07 03:31:54
On 2021/6/6 15:10, Parav Pandit wrote:
Hi Yunsheng,
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 7:05 AM
On 2021/6/3 19:19, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
A user optionally provides the external controller number when user
wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
Hi, Parav
I was planing to use controller id to solve the devlink instance representing
problem for multi-function which shares common resource in the same ASIC,
see [1].
It seems the controller id used here is to differentiate the function used in
different host?
That’s correct. Controller holds one or more PCI functions (PF,VF,SF).
I am not sure I understand the exact usage of controller and why controller
id is in "devlink_port_*_attrs".
Let's consider a simplified case where there is two PF(supposing both have
VF enabled), and each PF has different controller and each PF corresponds
to a different physical port(Or it is about multi-host case multi PF may
sharing the same physical port?):
1. I suppose each PF has it's devlink instance for mlx case(I suppose each
VF can not have it's own devlink instance for VF shares the same physical
port with PF, right?).
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I understand
port flavour correctly).
If I understand above correctly, all ports in the same devlink instance should
have the same controller id, right? If yes, why not put the controller id in
the devlink instance?
In your case if there is single devlink instance representing ASIC, it is better to have health reporters under this single instance.
Devlink parameters do not span multiple devlink instance.
Yes, that is what I try to do: shared status/parameters in devlink instance,
physical port specific status/parameters in devlink port instance.
So if you need to control devlink instance parameters of each function byitself, you likely need devlink instance for each.
And still continue to have ASIC wide health reporters under single instance that represents whole ASIC.
I do not think each function need a devlink instance if there is a
devlink instance representing a whole ASIC, using the devlink port
instance to represent the function seems enough?
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 9:01 AM
On 2021/6/6 15:10, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
Hi Yunsheng,
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 7:05 AM
On 2021/6/3 19:19, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
A user optionally provides the external controller number when user
wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
Hi, Parav
I was planing to use controller id to solve the devlink instance
representing problem for multi-function which shares common resource
in the same ASIC, see [1].
It seems the controller id used here is to differentiate the function
used in different host?
That’s correct. Controller holds one or more PCI functions (PF,VF,SF).
I am not sure I understand the exact usage of controller and why controller id
is in "devlink_port_*_attrs".
Let's consider a simplified case where there is two PF(supposing both have
VF enabled), and each PF has different controller and each PF corresponds to
a different physical port(Or it is about multi-host case multi PF may sharing
the same physical port?):
Typically single host with two PFs have their own physical ports.
Multi-host with two PFs, on each host they share respective physical ports.
Single host:
Pf0.physical_port = p0
Pf1.physical_port = p1.
Multi-host (two) host setup
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
1. I suppose each PF has it's devlink instance for mlx case(I suppose each
VF can not have it's own devlink instance for VF shares the same physical
port with PF, right?).
VF and SF ports are of flavour VIRTUAL.
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on switchdev device.
If I understand above correctly, all ports in the same devlink instance should
have the same controller id, right? If yes, why not put the controller id in the
devlink instance?
Need not be. All PCI_{PF,VF,SF} can have controller id different for different controllers.
Usually each multi-host is a different controller.
Refer to this diagram [1] and detailed description.
quoted
In your case if there is single devlink instance representing ASIC, it is better
to have health reporters under this single instance.
quoted
Devlink parameters do not span multiple devlink instance.
Yes, that is what I try to do: shared status/parameters in devlink instance,
physical port specific status/parameters in devlink port instance.
quoted
So if you need to control devlink instance parameters of each function
byitself, you likely need devlink instance for each.
quoted
And still continue to have ASIC wide health reporters under single instance
that represents whole ASIC.
I do not think each function need a devlink instance if there is a devlink
instance representing a whole ASIC, using the devlink port instance to
represent the function seems enough?
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-07 10:56:59
On 2021/6/7 14:10, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 9:01 AM
On 2021/6/6 15:10, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
Hi Yunsheng,
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 7:05 AM
On 2021/6/3 19:19, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
A user optionally provides the external controller number when user
wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
Hi, Parav
I was planing to use controller id to solve the devlink instance
representing problem for multi-function which shares common resource
in the same ASIC, see [1].
It seems the controller id used here is to differentiate the function
used in different host?
That’s correct. Controller holds one or more PCI functions (PF,VF,SF).
I am not sure I understand the exact usage of controller and why controller id
is in "devlink_port_*_attrs".
Let's consider a simplified case where there is two PF(supposing both have
VF enabled), and each PF has different controller and each PF corresponds to
a different physical port(Or it is about multi-host case multi PF may sharing
the same physical port?):
Typically single host with two PFs have their own physical ports.
Multi-host with two PFs, on each host they share respective physical ports.
Single host:
Pf0.physical_port = p0
Pf1.physical_port = p1.
Multi-host (two) host setup
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
Multi-host (two) host setup with separate physical port for each host:
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p1
Does above use case make sense for mlx, it seems a common case for
our internal use.
quoted
1. I suppose each PF has it's devlink instance for mlx case(I suppose each
VF can not have it's own devlink instance for VF shares the same physical
port with PF, right?).
VF and SF ports are of flavour VIRTUAL.
Which devlink instance does the flavour VIRTUAL port instance for VF and SF is
registered to?
Does it mean VF has it's own devlink instance in VM when it is passed a VM,
and flavour VIRTUAL port instance for that VF is registered to that devlink
instance in the VM too？
Even in the same host as PF, the VF also has it's own devlink instance?
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY mode, the
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to created?
quoted
If I understand above correctly, all ports in the same devlink instance should
have the same controller id, right? If yes, why not put the controller id in the
devlink instance?
Need not be. All PCI_{PF,VF,SF} can have controller id different for different controllers.
The point is that two VF from different PF may be in the different
host, all VF of a specific PF need to be in the same host, right?
otherwise it may break PCI enumeration process?
If yes, as PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device(which means PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance is in the
same host, as the host corresponding to "controller_num=0" in diagram
[1]), so it seems all the PCI_{PF,VF,SF} of a specific PF should have
the same controller id, and using a controller id of the devlink instance
in "controller_num=0" in diagram [1] seems enough?
Usually each multi-host is a different controller.
Refer to this diagram [1] and detailed description.
devlink instance does not exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1" in diagram [1]?
Or devlink instance does exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1", but the mode of that devlink instance is
DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY in diagram [1]?
Also, eswitch mode can only be set on the devlink instance corresponding
to PF, but not for VF/SF(supposing that VF/SF could have it's own devlink
instance too), right?
quoted
quoted
In your case if there is single devlink instance representing ASIC, it is better
to have health reporters under this single instance.
quoted
Devlink parameters do not span multiple devlink instance.
Yes, that is what I try to do: shared status/parameters in devlink instance,
physical port specific status/parameters in devlink port instance.
quoted
So if you need to control devlink instance parameters of each function
byitself, you likely need devlink instance for each.
quoted
And still continue to have ASIC wide health reporters under single instance
that represents whole ASIC.
I do not think each function need a devlink instance if there is a devlink
instance representing a whole ASIC, using the devlink port instance to
represent the function seems enough?
'devlink port function's is equivalent of hypervisor/nicvisor entity controlled by the network/sysadmin.
While devlink instance of a given PF,VF,SF is managed by the user of such function itself.
'devlink port function' means "struct devlink_port", right?
It seems 'devlink port function' in the host is representing
a VF when devlink instance of that VF is in the VM?
For example when a VF is mapped to a VM, devlink instance of this VF resides in the VM managed by the guest VM.
Does the user in VM really care about devlink info or configuration
when network/sysadmin has configured the VF through 'devlink port function'
in the host?
which devlink info or configuration does user need to query or configure
in a VM?
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
On 2021/6/7 14:10, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 9:01 AM
On 2021/6/6 15:10, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
Hi Yunsheng,
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 7:05 AM
On 2021/6/3 19:19, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
A user optionally provides the external controller number when
user wants to create devlink port for the external controller.
Hi, Parav
I was planing to use controller id to solve the devlink instance
representing problem for multi-function which shares common
resource in the same ASIC, see [1].
It seems the controller id used here is to differentiate the
function used in different host?
That’s correct. Controller holds one or more PCI functions (PF,VF,SF).
I am not sure I understand the exact usage of controller and why
controller id is in "devlink_port_*_attrs".
Let's consider a simplified case where there is two PF(supposing both
have VF enabled), and each PF has different controller and each PF
corresponds to a different physical port(Or it is about multi-host
case multi PF may sharing the same physical port?):
Typically single host with two PFs have their own physical ports.
Multi-host with two PFs, on each host they share respective physical ports.
Single host:
Pf0.physical_port = p0
Pf1.physical_port = p1.
Multi-host (two) host setup
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
Multi-host (two) host setup with separate physical port for each host:
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p1
Does above use case make sense for mlx, it seems a common case for our
internal use.
It is mlx5 use case too.
quoted
quoted
1. I suppose each PF has it's devlink instance for mlx case(I suppose each
VF can not have it's own devlink instance for VF shares the same physical
port with PF, right?).
VF and SF ports are of flavour VIRTUAL.
Which devlink instance does the flavour VIRTUAL port instance for VF and SF
is registered to?
To the devlink instance of the VF/SF.
Does it mean VF has it's own devlink instance in VM when it is passed a VM,
and flavour VIRTUAL port instance for that VF is registered to that devlink
instance in the VM too？
Yes.
Even in the same host as PF, the VF also has it's own devlink instance?
Yes.
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY mode,
the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to created?
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or devlink ports.
quoted
quoted
If I understand above correctly, all ports in the same devlink
instance should have the same controller id, right? If yes, why not
put the controller id in the devlink instance?
Need not be. All PCI_{PF,VF,SF} can have controller id different for
different controllers.
The point is that two VF from different PF may be in the different host, all VF
of a specific PF need to be in the same host, right?
otherwise it may break PCI enumeration process?
Sure. VFs belong to PF, PF belong to controller, controller is plugged into a host root complex.
If yes, as PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on switchdev
device(which means PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance is in the same host, as the
host corresponding to "controller_num=0" in diagram [1]), so it seems all the
PCI_{PF,VF,SF} of a specific PF should have the same controller id,
Yes.
and using
a controller id of the devlink instance in "controller_num=0" in diagram [1]
seems enough?
Yes.
quoted
Usually each multi-host is a different controller.
Refer to this diagram [1] and detailed description.
devlink instance does not exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1" in diagram [1]?
Devlink instance do exist for controller=1 related PCI PF,VF,SF devices when those functions are plugged in the host.
Or devlink instance does exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1", but the mode of that devlink instance is
DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY in diagram [1]?
As you can see that eswitch is located only on controller=0.
This eswitch is serving PF, VF, SFs of controller=1 + controlloler=0 as well.
Also, eswitch mode can only be set on the devlink instance corresponding to
PF, but not for VF/SF(supposing that VF/SF could have it's own devlink
instance too), right?
Yes. Eswitch can be located on the VF too. Mlx5 driver doesn't have it yet on VF.
This may be some nested eswitch in future. I do not know when.
by the network/sysadmin.
quoted
While devlink instance of a given PF,VF,SF is managed by the user of such
function itself.
'devlink port function' means "struct devlink_port", right?
'function' is the object managing the function connected on the otherside of this port.
This includes its hw_addr, rate, state, operational state.
It seems 'devlink port function' in the host is representing a VF when devlink
instance of that VF is in the VM?
Right.
quoted
For example when a VF is mapped to a VM, devlink instance of this VF
resides in the VM managed by the guest VM.
Does the user in VM really care about devlink info or configuration when
network/sysadmin has configured the VF through 'devlink port function'
in the host?
Yes. devlink instance offers many knobs in uniform way on PF, VF, SF.
They are in use in mlx5 for devlink params, reload, net ns.
which devlink info or configuration does user need to query or configure in a
VM?
Usually not much.
Few examples that mlx5 users do with devlink instance of VF in a VM are, devlink params, devlink reload, board info. Health reporters, health recovery to name few.
@@ -4324,7 +4335,7 @@ static int __cmd_health_show(struct dl *dl, bool
show_device, bool show_port);
static void cmd_port_add_help(void)
{
- pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour
FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ]\n");
quoted
+ pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour
FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ] [ controller CNUM ]\n");
This line and the one above need to be wrapped. This addition puts it well
into the 90s.
It’s a print message.
I was following coding style of [1] that says "However, never break user-visible strings such as printk messages because that breaks the ability to grep for them.".
Recent code of dcb_ets.c has similar long string in print. So I didn't wrap it.
Should we warp it?
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#breaking-long-lines-and-strings
@@ -4324,7 +4335,7 @@ static int __cmd_health_show(struct dl *dl, bool
show_device, bool show_port);
static void cmd_port_add_help(void)
{
- pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour
FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ]\n");
quoted
+ pr_err(" devlink port add { DEV | DEV/PORT_INDEX } flavour
FLAVOUR pfnum PFNUM [ sfnum SFNUM ] [ controller CNUM ]\n");
This line and the one above need to be wrapped. This addition puts it well
into the 90s.
It’s a print message.
I was following coding style of [1] that says "However, never break user-visible strings such as printk messages because that breaks the ability to grep for them.".
Recent code of dcb_ets.c has similar long string in print. So I didn't wrap it.
I missed that when reviewing the dcb command then.
[1] is referring to messages from kernel code, and I agree with that
style. This is help message from iproute2. I tend to keep my terminal
widths between 80 and 90 columns, so the long help lines from commands
are not very friendly causing me to resize the terminal.
[1] is referring to messages from kernel code, and I agree with that style. This
is help message from iproute2. I tend to keep my terminal widths between
80 and 90 columns, so the long help lines from commands are not very
friendly causing me to resize the terminal.
I see. So do you recommend splitting the print message?
I personally feel easier to follow kernel coding standard as much possible in spirit of "grep them". 😊
But its really up to you. Please let me know.
From: David Ahern <hidden> Date: 2021-06-07 15:15:51
On 6/7/21 9:12 AM, Parav Pandit wrote:
I see. So do you recommend splitting the print message?
I personally feel easier to follow kernel coding standard as much possible in spirit of "grep them". 😊
But its really up to you. Please let me know.
yes, I am saying user help messages from commands are different than
kernel code. Users are not typically grepping iproute2 source code
looking up the help string.
[1] is referring to messages from kernel code, and I agree with that style. This
is help message from iproute2. I tend to keep my terminal widths between
80 and 90 columns, so the long help lines from commands are not very
friendly causing me to resize the terminal.
I see. So do you recommend splitting the print message?
I personally feel easier to follow kernel coding standard as much possible in spirit of "grep them". 😊
But its really up to you. Please let me know.
There are different type of strings:
1. help,
2. error messages,
3. informational messages,
4. displaying a configuration
1. is "how do I use this command". There is no reason to make that 1
gigantic line. All of the iproute2 commands wrap the help. My comment
above is on this category.
2. and 3. should not be wrapped to allow someone to attempt to go from
"why did I get this output" to a line of code (or many lines). This is
the kernel reference above.
4. Displaying attributes and settings for some object getting dumped.
The lines can get really long and unreadable to humans; these should be
split across multiple lines - like iproute2 commands do. There is no
reason for this to be on online unless the user asks for it via -oneline
option.
[1] is referring to messages from kernel code, and I agree with that
style. This is help message from iproute2. I tend to keep my terminal
widths between
80 and 90 columns, so the long help lines from commands are not very
friendly causing me to resize the terminal.
I see. So do you recommend splitting the print message?
I personally feel easier to follow kernel coding standard as much
possible in spirit of "grep them". 😊
But its really up to you. Please let me know.
There are different type of strings:
1. help,
2. error messages,
3. informational messages,
4. displaying a configuration
1. is "how do I use this command". There is no reason to make that 1 gigantic
line. All of the iproute2 commands wrap the help. My comment above is on
this category.
2. and 3. should not be wrapped to allow someone to attempt to go from
"why did I get this output" to a line of code (or many lines). This is the kernel
reference above.
4. Displaying attributes and settings for some object getting dumped.
The lines can get really long and unreadable to humans; these should be split
across multiple lines - like iproute2 commands do. There is no reason for this
to be on online unless the user asks for it via -oneline option.
Thanks David for the detailed explanation.
It totally make sense. I am fixing it.
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-08 03:27:56
On 2021/6/7 19:12, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
[..]
quoted
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY mode,
the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to created?
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or devlink ports.
It seems each devlink port instance corresponds to a netdevice.
More specificly, the devlink instance is created in the
struct pci_driver' probe function of a pci function, a devlink
port instance is created and registered to that devlink instance
when a netdev of that pci function is created?
As in diagram [1], the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL)
for ctrl-0-pf0 is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0 is created in
the host of smartNIC, the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL)
for ctrl-0-pf0vfN is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0vfN is created
in the host of smartNIC, right?
When eswitch mode is set to DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_SWITCHDEV, the representor
netdev for PF/VF in "controller_num=1" is created in the host of smartNIC,
so is the devlink port instance(FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF}) corresponding to that
representor netdev just created in the host of smartNIC? More specificly,
devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_PCI_PF) for ctrl-1-pf0 and devlink port
instance (flavour FLAVOUR_PCI_VF)for ctrl-1-pf0vfN?
When "controller_num=1" is plugged to a server, the server host creates
devlink instance and devlink port instance in the host of server as
similar as the ctrl-0-pf0 and ctrl-0-pf0vfN in the host of smartNIC?
quoted
quoted
quoted
If I understand above correctly, all ports in the same devlink
instance should have the same controller id, right? If yes, why not
put the controller id in the devlink instance?
Need not be. All PCI_{PF,VF,SF} can have controller id different for
different controllers.
The point is that two VF from different PF may be in the different host, all VF
of a specific PF need to be in the same host, right?
otherwise it may break PCI enumeration process?
Sure. VFs belong to PF, PF belong to controller, controller is plugged into a host root complex.
quoted
If yes, as PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on switchdev
device(which means PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance is in the same host, as the
host corresponding to "controller_num=0" in diagram [1]), so it seems all the
PCI_{PF,VF,SF} of a specific PF should have the same controller id,
Yes.
quoted
and using
a controller id of the devlink instance in "controller_num=0" in diagram [1]
seems enough?
Yes.
quoted
quoted
Usually each multi-host is a different controller.
Refer to this diagram [1] and detailed description.
devlink instance does not exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1" in diagram [1]?
Devlink instance do exist for controller=1 related PCI PF,VF,SF devices when those functions are plugged in the host.
quoted
Or devlink instance does exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1", but the mode of that devlink instance is
DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY in diagram [1]?
As you can see that eswitch is located only on controller=0.
This eswitch is serving PF, VF, SFs of controller=1 + controlloler=0 as well.
How do we decide where eswitch is located? through some fw/hw
configuration?
It seems if the eswitch is enabled on "controller=1", that is
a nested eswitch too, which you mentioned below?
quoted
Also, eswitch mode can only be set on the devlink instance corresponding to
PF, but not for VF/SF(supposing that VF/SF could have it's own devlink
instance too), right?
Yes. Eswitch can be located on the VF too. Mlx5 driver doesn't have it yet on VF.
This may be some nested eswitch in future. I do not know when.
quoted
by the network/sysadmin.
quoted
While devlink instance of a given PF,VF,SF is managed by the user of such
function itself.
'devlink port function' means "struct devlink_port", right?
'function' is the object managing the function connected on the otherside of this port.
This includes its hw_addr, rate, state, operational state.
Does "other side of this port" means the pci function that is most
likely have been passed through to a VM?
"devlink port" without the "function" represents the representor
netdev on the host where eswitch is located?
quoted
It seems 'devlink port function' in the host is representing a VF when devlink
instance of that VF is in the VM?
Right.
quoted
quoted
For example when a VF is mapped to a VM, devlink instance of this VF
resides in the VM managed by the guest VM.
Does the user in VM really care about devlink info or configuration when
network/sysadmin has configured the VF through 'devlink port function'
in the host?
Yes. devlink instance offers many knobs in uniform way on PF, VF, SF.
They are in use in mlx5 for devlink params, reload, net ns.
"net ns" refer to "net namespace", right?
I am not sure how devlink instance related to net namespace yet.
I thought devlink is not limited to networking, it can be used in
other pcie device other than ethernet device?
quoted
which devlink info or configuration does user need to query or configure in a
VM?
Usually not much.
Few examples that mlx5 users do with devlink instance of VF in a VM are, devlink params, devlink reload, board info. Health reporters, health recovery to name few.
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:58 AM
On 2021/6/7 19:12, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
[..]
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY
mode, the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to
created?
quoted
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or devlink ports.
It seems each devlink port instance corresponds to a netdevice.
More specificly, the devlink instance is created in the struct pci_driver' probe
function of a pci function, a devlink port instance is created and registered to
that devlink instance when a netdev of that pci function is created?
Yes.
As in diagram [1], the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) for
ctrl-0-pf0 is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0 is created in the host of
smartNIC, the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL) for ctrl-0-
pf0vfN is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0vfN is created in the host of
smartNIC, right?
Ctrl-0-pf0vfN, ctrl-0-pf0 ports are eswitch ports. They are created where there is eswitch.
Usually in smartnic where eswitch is located.
When eswitch mode is set to DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_SWITCHDEV, the
representor netdev for PF/VF in "controller_num=1" is created in the host of
smartNIC, so is the devlink port instance(FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF})
corresponding to that representor netdev just created in the host of
smartNIC? More specificly, devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_PCI_PF)
for ctrl-1-pf0 and devlink port instance (flavour FLAVOUR_PCI_VF)for ctrl-1-
pf0vfN?
I do not know what you mean by "host of smartnic". But as clarified in diagram and above,
They are created on the eswitch device.
When "controller_num=1" is plugged to a server, the server host creates
devlink instance and devlink port instance in the host of server as similar as
the ctrl-0-pf0 and ctrl-0-pf0vfN in the host of smartNIC?
Since eswitch is not in the controller=1, controller 1 is just hosting PCI PF, VF, SF functions.
Either it has PHYSICAL or VIRTUAL ports along with its netdevice and devlink instance.
quoted
quoted
Or devlink instance does exist in the host corresponding to
"controller_num=1", but the mode of that devlink instance is
DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY in diagram [1]?
As you can see that eswitch is located only on controller=0.
This eswitch is serving PF, VF, SFs of controller=1 + controlloler=0 as well.
How do we decide where eswitch is located? through some fw/hw
configuration?
This is usually decided by the hardware.
It seems if the eswitch is enabled on "controller=1", that is a nested eswitch
too, which you mentioned below?
Yes.
quoted
quoted
Also, eswitch mode can only be set on the devlink instance
corresponding to PF, but not for VF/SF(supposing that VF/SF could
have it's own devlink instance too), right?
Yes. Eswitch can be located on the VF too. Mlx5 driver doesn't have it yet
on VF.
quoted
This may be some nested eswitch in future. I do not know when.
quoted
by the network/sysadmin.
quoted
While devlink instance of a given PF,VF,SF is managed by the user of
such
function itself.
'devlink port function' means "struct devlink_port", right?
'function' is the object managing the function connected on the otherside
of this port.
quoted
This includes its hw_addr, rate, state, operational state.
Does "other side of this port" means the pci function that is most likely have
been passed through to a VM?
Yes.
"devlink port" without the "function" represents the representor netdev on
the host where eswitch is located?
Yes.
quoted
quoted
It seems 'devlink port function' in the host is representing a VF
when devlink instance of that VF is in the VM?
Right.
quoted
quoted
For example when a VF is mapped to a VM, devlink instance of this VF
resides in the VM managed by the guest VM.
Does the user in VM really care about devlink info or configuration
when network/sysadmin has configured the VF through 'devlink port
function'
quoted
quoted
in the host?
Yes. devlink instance offers many knobs in uniform way on PF, VF, SF.
They are in use in mlx5 for devlink params, reload, net ns.
"net ns" refer to "net namespace", right?
Yes.
I am not sure how devlink instance related to net namespace yet.
I thought devlink is not limited to networking, it can be used in other pcie
device other than ethernet device?
It can be. And it can be used for networking devices too and hence it is attached to single net ns.
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-08 07:36:11
On 2021/6/8 13:26, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:58 AM
On 2021/6/7 19:12, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
[..]
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY
mode, the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to
created?
quoted
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or devlink ports.
It seems each devlink port instance corresponds to a netdevice.
More specificly, the devlink instance is created in the struct pci_driver' probe
function of a pci function, a devlink port instance is created and registered to
that devlink instance when a netdev of that pci function is created?
Yes.
quoted
As in diagram [1], the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) for
ctrl-0-pf0 is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0 is created in the host of
smartNIC, the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL) for ctrl-0-
pf0vfN is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0vfN is created in the host of
smartNIC, right?
Ctrl-0-pf0vfN, ctrl-0-pf0 ports are eswitch ports. They are created where there is eswitch.
Usually in smartnic where eswitch is located.
Does diagram in [1] corresponds to the multi-host (two) host setup as
memtioned previously?
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
Let's say H1 = server and H2 = smartNIC as the pci rc connected to below:
---------------------------------------------------------
| |
| --------- --------- ------- ------- |
----------- | | vf(s) | | sf(s) | |vf(s)| |sf(s)| |
| server | | ------- ----/---- ---/----- ------- ---/--- ---/--- |
| pci rc |=== | pf0 |______/________/ | pf1 |___/_______/ |
| connect | | ------- ------- |
----------- | | controller_num=1 (no eswitch) |
------|--------------------------------------------------
(internal wire)
|
---------------------------------------------------------
| devlink eswitch ports and reps |
| ----------------------------------------------------- |
| |ctrl-0 | ctrl-0 | ctrl-0 | ctrl-0 | ctrl-0 |ctrl-0 | |
| |pf0 | pf0vfN | pf0sfN | pf1 | pf1vfN |pf1sfN | |
| ----------------------------------------------------- |
| |ctrl-1 | ctrl-1 | ctrl-1 | ctrl-1 | ctrl-1 |ctrl-1 | |
| |pf0 | pf0vfN | pf0sfN | pf1 | pf1vfN |pf1sfN | |
| ----------------------------------------------------- |
| |
| |
----------- | --------- --------- ------- ------- |
| smartNIC| | | vf(s) | | sf(s) | |vf(s)| |sf(s)| |
| pci rc |==| ------- ----/---- ---/----- ------- ---/--- ---/--- |
| connect | | | pf0 |______/________/ | pf1 |___/_______/ |
----------- | ------- ------- |
| |
| local controller_num=0 (eswitch) |
---------------------------------------------------------
A vanilla kernel can run on the smartNIC host, right?
what the smartNIC host see is two PF corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0 and
ctrl-0-pf1 When the kernel is boot up first and mlx driver is not loaded
yet, right?
I am not sure it is ok to leave out the VF and SF, but let's leave them
out for simplicity now.
When mlx driver is loaded, two devlink instances are created, which
corresponds to ctrl-0-pf0 and ctrl-0-pf1, and two devlink port instances
(flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) is created and registered to corresponding
devlink instances just created, right?
As the eswitch mode is based on devlink instance, Let's only set the mode
of ctrl-0-pf0' devlink instance to DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_SWITCHDEV, the
representor netdev of ctrl-1-pf0 is created and devlink port instance of
that representor netdev is created and registered to devlink instances
corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0?
I think I miss something here, the above does not seems right, because：
1. For single host case：the PF is not passed through to the VM, devlink port
instance of VF's representor netdev can be registered to the devlink instance
corresponding to it's PF, right?
2. But for two-host case as above, do we need to create a devlink instances
for the PF corresponding to ctrl-1-pf0 in smartNIC host?
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 1:06 PM
On 2021/6/8 13:26, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:58 AM
On 2021/6/7 19:12, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
[..]
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY
mode, the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to
created?
quoted
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or devlink
ports.
quoted
quoted
It seems each devlink port instance corresponds to a netdevice.
More specificly, the devlink instance is created in the struct
pci_driver' probe function of a pci function, a devlink port instance
is created and registered to that devlink instance when a netdev of that
pci function is created?
quoted
quoted
Yes.
quoted
As in diagram [1], the devlink port instance(flavour
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) for
ctrl-0-pf0 is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0 is created in the
host of smartNIC, the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL)
for ctrl-0- pf0vfN is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0vfN is
created in the host of smartNIC, right?
Ctrl-0-pf0vfN, ctrl-0-pf0 ports are eswitch ports. They are created where
there is eswitch.
quoted
Usually in smartnic where eswitch is located.
Does diagram in [1] corresponds to the multi-host (two) host setup as
memtioned previously?
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
what the smartNIC host see is two PF corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0 and
ctrl-0-pf1 When the kernel is boot up first and mlx driver is not loaded yet,
right?
I am not sure it is ok to leave out the VF and SF, but let's leave them out for
simplicity now.
When mlx driver is loaded, two devlink instances are created, which
corresponds to ctrl-0-pf0 and ctrl-0-pf1, and two devlink port instances
(flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) is created and registered to corresponding
devlink instances just created, right?
As the eswitch mode is based on devlink instance, Let's only set the mode of
ctrl-0-pf0' devlink instance to DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_SWITCHDEV, the
representor netdev of ctrl-1-pf0 is created and devlink port instance of that
representor netdev is created and registered to devlink instances
corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0?
I think I miss something here, the above does not seems right, because：
1. For single host case：the PF is not passed through to the VM, devlink port
instance of VF's representor netdev can be registered to the devlink
instance
corresponding to it's PF, right?
Yes, if I understand your question right.
2. But for two-host case as above, do we need to create a devlink instances
for the PF corresponding to ctrl-1-pf0 in smartNIC host?
You can choose not to create a devlink instance in external controller PF. It may not be even a Linux OS running there.
I read questions few more times, but I find it hard to understand what you really want to ask.
Not sure I understood you.
Trying again,
The model is really very straight forward as visible in the diagram.
There is one PF that has the eswitch. Eswitch contains representor ports.
Each representor port represent either PF, VF or SF.
This PF, VF or SF can be of local controller residing on the eswitch device or it can be of an external controller(s).
Here external controller = 1.
Every single PF, VF, SF has devlink instance including the eswitch PF and PF of external controller (often called as external host).
Why such devlink instance exists? -> I explained you before in [1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/PH0PR12MB5481FB8528A90E34FA3578C1DC389@PH0PR12MB5481.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-08 09:32:13
On 2021/6/8 16:47, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 1:06 PM
On 2021/6/8 13:26, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:58 AM
On 2021/6/7 19:12, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
[..]
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY
mode, the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to
created?
quoted
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or devlink
ports.
quoted
quoted
It seems each devlink port instance corresponds to a netdevice.
More specificly, the devlink instance is created in the struct
pci_driver' probe function of a pci function, a devlink port instance
is created and registered to that devlink instance when a netdev of that
pci function is created?
quoted
quoted
Yes.
quoted
As in diagram [1], the devlink port instance(flavour
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) for
ctrl-0-pf0 is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0 is created in the
host of smartNIC, the devlink port instance(flavour FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL)
for ctrl-0- pf0vfN is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0vfN is
created in the host of smartNIC, right?
Ctrl-0-pf0vfN, ctrl-0-pf0 ports are eswitch ports. They are created where
there is eswitch.
quoted
Usually in smartnic where eswitch is located.
Does diagram in [1] corresponds to the multi-host (two) host setup as
memtioned previously?
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
what the smartNIC host see is two PF corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0 and
ctrl-0-pf1 When the kernel is boot up first and mlx driver is not loaded yet,
right?
I am not sure it is ok to leave out the VF and SF, but let's leave them out for
simplicity now.
When mlx driver is loaded, two devlink instances are created, which
corresponds to ctrl-0-pf0 and ctrl-0-pf1, and two devlink port instances
(flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) is created and registered to corresponding
devlink instances just created, right?
As the eswitch mode is based on devlink instance, Let's only set the mode of
ctrl-0-pf0' devlink instance to DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_SWITCHDEV, the
representor netdev of ctrl-1-pf0 is created and devlink port instance of that
representor netdev is created and registered to devlink instances
corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0?
I think I miss something here, the above does not seems right, because：
1. For single host case：the PF is not passed through to the VM, devlink port
instance of VF's representor netdev can be registered to the devlink
instance
corresponding to it's PF, right?
Yes, if I understand your question right.
quoted
2. But for two-host case as above, do we need to create a devlink instances
for the PF corresponding to ctrl-1-pf0 in smartNIC host?
You can choose not to create a devlink instance in external controller PF. It may not be even a Linux OS running there.
I read questions few more times, but I find it hard to understand what you really want to ask.
Not sure I understood you.
Trying again,
The model is really very straight forward as visible in the diagram.
There is one PF that has the eswitch. Eswitch contains representor ports.
I thought the representor ports of a PF'eswitch is decided by the function
under a specific PF(For example, the PF itself and the VF under this PF)?
Each representor port represent either PF, VF or SF.
This PF, VF or SF can be of local controller residing on the eswitch device or it can be of an external controller(s).
Here external controller = 1.
If I understood above correctly:
The fw/hw decide which PF has the eswitch, and how many devlink/representor
port does this eswitch has?
Suppose PF0 of controller_num=0 in have the eswitch, and the eswitch may has
devlink/representor port representing other PF, like PF1 in controller_num=0,
and even PF0/PF1 in controller_num=1?
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 3:02 PM
On 2021/6/8 16:47, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 1:06 PM
On 2021/6/8 13:26, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:58 AM
On 2021/6/7 19:12, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 4:27 PM
[..]
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
2. each PF's devlink instance has three types of port, which is
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, FLAVOUR_PCI_PF and
FLAVOUR_PCI_VF(supposing I
quoted
quoted
understand
port flavour correctly).
FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} belongs to eswitch (representor) side on
switchdev device.
If devlink instance or eswitch is in
DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_LEGACY
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
mode, the FLAVOUR_PCI_{PF,VF,SF} port instance does not need to
created?
quoted
No. in eswitch legacy, there are no representor netdevice or
devlink
ports.
quoted
quoted
It seems each devlink port instance corresponds to a netdevice.
More specificly, the devlink instance is created in the struct
pci_driver' probe function of a pci function, a devlink port
instance is created and registered to that devlink instance when a
netdev of that
pci function is created?
quoted
quoted
Yes.
quoted
As in diagram [1], the devlink port instance(flavour
FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) for
ctrl-0-pf0 is created when the netdev of ctrl-0-pf0 is created in
the host of smartNIC, the devlink port instance(flavour
FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL) for ctrl-0- pf0vfN is created when the netdev of
ctrl-0-pf0vfN is created in the host of smartNIC, right?
Ctrl-0-pf0vfN, ctrl-0-pf0 ports are eswitch ports. They are created
where
there is eswitch.
quoted
Usually in smartnic where eswitch is located.
Does diagram in [1] corresponds to the multi-host (two) host setup as
memtioned previously?
H1.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H1.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
H2.pf0.phyical_port = p0.
H2.pf1.phyical_port = p1.
what the smartNIC host see is two PF corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0 and
ctrl-0-pf1 When the kernel is boot up first and mlx driver is not
loaded yet, right?
I am not sure it is ok to leave out the VF and SF, but let's leave
them out for simplicity now.
When mlx driver is loaded, two devlink instances are created, which
corresponds to ctrl-0-pf0 and ctrl-0-pf1, and two devlink port
instances (flavour FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL) is created and registered to
corresponding devlink instances just created, right?
As the eswitch mode is based on devlink instance, Let's only set the
mode of ctrl-0-pf0' devlink instance to
DEVLINK_ESWITCH_MODE_SWITCHDEV, the representor netdev of ctrl-1-
pf0
quoted
quoted
is created and devlink port instance of that representor netdev is
created and registered to devlink instances corresponding to ctrl-0-pf0?
I think I miss something here, the above does not seems right,
because：
1. For single host case：the PF is not passed through to the VM, devlink
port
quoted
quoted
instance of VF's representor netdev can be registered to the
devlink instance
corresponding to it's PF, right?
Yes, if I understand your question right.
quoted
2. But for two-host case as above, do we need to create a devlink
instances
quoted
quoted
for the PF corresponding to ctrl-1-pf0 in smartNIC host?
You can choose not to create a devlink instance in external controller PF. It
may not be even a Linux OS running there.
quoted
I read questions few more times, but I find it hard to understand what you
really want to ask.
quoted
Not sure I understood you.
Trying again,
The model is really very straight forward as visible in the diagram.
There is one PF that has the eswitch. Eswitch contains representor ports.
I thought the representor ports of a PF'eswitch is decided by the function
under a specific PF(For example, the PF itself and the VF under this PF)?
Eswitch is not per PF in context of smartnic/multi-host.
PF _has_ eswitch that contains the representor ports for PF, VF, SF.
quoted
Each representor port represent either PF, VF or SF.
This PF, VF or SF can be of local controller residing on the eswitch device or
it can be of an external controller(s).
quoted
Here external controller = 1.
If I understood above correctly:
The fw/hw decide which PF has the eswitch, and how many
devlink/representor port does this eswitch has?
Number of ports are dynamic. When new SFs/VFs are created, ports get added to the switch.
Suppose PF0 of controller_num=0 in have the eswitch, and the eswitch may
has devlink/representor port representing other PF, like PF1 in
controller_num=0, and even PF0/PF1 in controller_num=1?
From: Yunsheng Lin <hidden> Date: 2021-06-09 11:35:24
On 2021/6/9 17:24, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
I thought the representor ports of a PF'eswitch is decided by the function
under a specific PF(For example, the PF itself and the VF under this PF)?
Eswitch is not per PF in context of smartnic/multi-host.
So the Eswitch may be per PF in context of *non*-"smartnic/multi-host",
right?
It seems that it makes more sense to set the eswitch mode based on
devlink port instance instead of devlink instance if devlink instance
represents a multi-function ASIC?
PF _has_ eswitch that contains the representor ports for PF, VF, SF.
quoted
quoted
Each representor port represent either PF, VF or SF.
This PF, VF or SF can be of local controller residing on the eswitch device or
it can be of an external controller(s).
quoted
Here external controller = 1.
If I understood above correctly:
The fw/hw decide which PF has the eswitch, and how many
devlink/representor port does this eswitch has?
Number of ports are dynamic. When new SFs/VFs are created, ports get added to the switch.
quoted
Suppose PF0 of controller_num=0 in have the eswitch, and the eswitch may
has devlink/representor port representing other PF, like PF1 in
controller_num=0, and even PF0/PF1 in controller_num=1?
Yes. Correct.
Thanks for clarifying, I think I can see the big picture now.
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 5:05 PM
On 2021/6/9 17:24, Parav Pandit wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Yunsheng Lin <redacted>
I thought the representor ports of a PF'eswitch is decided by the
function under a specific PF(For example, the PF itself and the VF under
this PF)?
quoted
Eswitch is not per PF in context of smartnic/multi-host.
So the Eswitch may be per PF in context of *non*-"smartnic/multi-host",
right?
Right.
It seems that it makes more sense to set the eswitch mode based on devlink
port instance instead of devlink instance if devlink instance represents a
multi-function ASIC?
Devlink ports are the children/sub objects of devlink instance.
Eswitch mode is per devlink instance that drives how its sub objects to be handled.
Shouldn't be other way around.
If you mean to say, that in multi-function ASIC, ASIC capabilities decide which devlink instance to support eswitch (and hence its ports), it make sense to me.
quoted
PF _has_ eswitch that contains the representor ports for PF, VF, SF.
quoted
quoted
Each representor port represent either PF, VF or SF.
This PF, VF or SF can be of local controller residing on the eswitch
device or
it can be of an external controller(s).
quoted
Here external controller = 1.
If I understood above correctly:
The fw/hw decide which PF has the eswitch, and how many
devlink/representor port does this eswitch has?
Number of ports are dynamic. When new SFs/VFs are created, ports get
added to the switch.
quoted
quoted
Suppose PF0 of controller_num=0 in have the eswitch, and the eswitch
may has devlink/representor port representing other PF, like PF1 in
controller_num=0, and even PF0/PF1 in controller_num=1?
Yes. Correct.
Thanks for clarifying, I think I can see the big picture now.