Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Jun 2021 11:41:09 -0700 | From | Jakub Kicinski <> | Subject | Re: [RFC net-next 0/8] Introducing subdev bus and devlink extension |
| |
On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 09:18:04 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote: > >> Yes, it is confusing, how about using the controler_id to indicate > >> different NIC? we can make sure controler_id is unqiue in the same > >> host, a controler_id corresponds to a devlink instance, vendor info > >> or serial num for the devlink instance can further indicate more info > >> to the system user? > >> > >> pci/controler_id/0000:03:00.0/61 > > > > What is a "controller id" in concrete terms? Another abstract ID which > > may change on every boot? > > My initial thinking is a id from a global IDA pool, which indeed may > change on every boot. > > I am not really thinking much deeper about the controller id, just > mirroring the bus identifiers for pcie device and ifindex for netdev,
devlink instance id seems fine, but there's already a controller concept in devlink so please steer clear of that naming.
> which may change too if the device is pluged into different pci slot > on every boot?
Heh. What is someone reflashes the part to change it's serial number? :) pci slot is reasonably stable, as proven by years of experience trying to find stable naming for netdevs.
> >> How about: > >> The PF first probed creates the devlink instance? PF probed later can > >> connect/register to that devlink instance created by the PF first probed. > >> It seems some locking need to ensure the above happens as intended too. > >> > >> About linking, the PF provide vendor info/serial number(or whatever is > >> unqiue between different vendor) of a controller it belong to, if the > >> controller does not exist yet, create one and connect/register to that > >> devlink instance, otherwise just do the connecting/registering. > > > > Sounds about right, but I don't understand why another ID is > > necessary. Why not allow devlink instances to have multiple names, > > like we allow aliases for netdevs these days? > > We could still allow devlink instances to have multiple names, > which seems to be more like devlink tool problem? > > For example, devlink tool could use the id or the vendor_info/ > serial_number to indicate a devlink instance according to user's > request.
Typing serial numbers seems pretty painful.
> Aliase could be allowed too as long as devlink core provide a > field and ops to set/get the field mirroring the ifalias for > netdevice?
I don't understand.
| |