On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:15:10 +0000 Saeed Mahameed wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 2021-12-15 at 11:22 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 18:19:16 +0000 Saeed Mahameed wrote:

quoted

After some internal discussions, the plan is to not push new
interfaces, but to utilize the existing devlink params interface
for devlink port functions.

We will suggest a more fine grained parameters to control a port
function (SF/VF) well-defined capabilities.

devlink port function param set/get DEV/PORT_INDEX name

PARAMETER

quoted

quoted

quoted

value VALUE cmode { runtime | driverinit | permanent }

Jiri is already on-board. Jakub I hope you are ok with this, let
us know if you have any concerns before we start implementation.

You can use mail pigeon to configure this, my questions were about
the feature itself not the interface.

We will have a parameter per feature we want to enable/disable instead
of a global "trust" knob.

So you're just asking me if I'm okay with devlink params regardless if I'm okay
with what they control? Not really, I prefer an API as created by this patches.

What shortcomings do you see in the finer granular approach we want to go to enable/disable
On a per feature basis instead of global knob?