Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 06:53:05PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 16:21:29 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> Okay, so devlink reload default for mlx5 will include also fw-activate
>> to align with mlxsw default.
>>
>> Meaning drivers that supports fw-activate will add it to the default
On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 10:09:20 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> >> But I am still missing something: fw-activate implies that it will
> >> activate a new FW image stored on flash, pending activation. What if the
> >> user wants to reset and reload the FW if no new FW pending ? Should we
> >> add --forc
On 8/10/2020 9:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 16:21:29 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> Okay, so devlink reload default for mlx5 will include also fw-activate
>> to align with mlxsw default.
>>
>> Meaning drivers that supports fw-activate will add it to the default.
>
> No per-
On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 16:21:29 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> Okay, so devlink reload default for mlx5 will include also fw-activate
> to align with mlxsw default.
>
> Meaning drivers that supports fw-activate will add it to the default.
No per-driver default.
Maybe the difference between mlxsw and
On 8/6/2020 9:25 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:02:58 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:39:46PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
AFAIU the per-driver default is needed because we went too low
level with what the action constitutes. We need maintain the higher
level
On 8/6/2020 11:25 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:02:58 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:39:46PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>>> AFAIU the per-driver default is needed because we went too low
>>> level with what the action constitutes. We need maintain the h
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:02:58 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:39:46PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
> >AFAIU the per-driver default is needed because we went too low
> >level with what the action constitutes. We need maintain the higher
> >level actions.
> >
> >The user clearly did
Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:39:46PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 12:04:18 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:57:03PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>> >I was trying to avoid having to provide a Cartesian product of
>> >operation and system disruption level, if any othe
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 12:04:18 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:57:03PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
> >I was trying to avoid having to provide a Cartesian product of
> >operation and system disruption level, if any other action can
> >be done "live" at some point.
> >
> >But no stron
Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:57:03PM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 16:14:42 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >devlink dev reload [ net-ns-respawn { PID | NAME | ID } ] [
>> >driver-param-init
>> >] [ fw-activate [ --live] ]
>>
>> Jakub, why do you prefer to have another extra level-spec
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 16:14:42 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >devlink dev reload [ net-ns-respawn { PID | NAME | ID } ] [ driver-param-init
> >] [ fw-activate [ --live] ]
>
> Jakub, why do you prefer to have another extra level-specific option
> "live"? I think it is clear to have it as a separate leve
Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 11:32:25PM CEST, mo...@mellanox.com wrote:
>
>On 7/31/2020 2:11 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:30:45 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> > > > > My expectations would be that the driver must perform the lowest
>> > > > > reset level possible that satisfies the re
On 7/31/2020 2:11 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:30:45 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
My expectations would be that the driver must perform the lowest
reset level possible that satisfies the requested functional change.
IOW driver may do more, in fact it should be acceptable for
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:30:45 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> >>> My expectations would be that the driver must perform the lowest
> >>> reset level possible that satisfies the requested functional change.
> >>> IOW driver may do more, in fact it should be acceptable for the
> >>> driver to always for
On 7/30/2020 12:07 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 17:54:08 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:06 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:18:30 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:44 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
From user perspective what's important is w
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 17:54:08 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> On 7/28/2020 11:06 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:18:30 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> >> On 7/28/2020 11:44 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >>> From user perspective what's important is what the reset achieves (and
> >>>
On 7/28/2020 11:06 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:18:30 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:44 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
From user perspective what's important is what the reset achieves (and
perhaps how destructive it is). We can define the reset levels as:
$ devlin
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:18:30 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> On 7/28/2020 11:44 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > From user perspective what's important is what the reset achieves (and
> > perhaps how destructive it is). We can define the reset levels as:
> >
> > $ devlink dev reload pci/:82:00.0 net-
On 7/28/2020 11:44 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:47:00 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
>> On 7/28/2020 6:58 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> But this is needed to maintain the existing behaviour which is different
>>> for different drivers.
>>
>> Which drivers behave differently here?
>
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:47:00 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> On 7/28/2020 6:58 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > But this is needed to maintain the existing behaviour which is different
> > for different drivers.
>
> Which drivers behave differently here?
I think Jiri refers to mlxsw vs mlx5.
mlxsw loads fi
On 7/28/2020 6:58 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 02:58:02AM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 14:02:21 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>>> Add devlink reload level to allow the user to request a specific reload
>>> level. The level parameter is optional, if not specifi
Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 02:58:02AM CEST, k...@kernel.org wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 14:02:21 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> Add devlink reload level to allow the user to request a specific reload
>> level. The level parameter is optional, if not specified then driver's
>> default reload level is used
On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 14:02:21 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> Add devlink reload level to allow the user to request a specific reload
> level. The level parameter is optional, if not specified then driver's
> default reload level is used (backward compatible).
Please don't leave space for driver-speci
Add devlink reload level to allow the user to request a specific reload
level. The level parameter is optional, if not specified then driver's
default reload level is used (backward compatible).
Reload levels supported are:
driver: driver entities re-instantiation only.
fw_reset: firmware reset and
24 matches
Mail list logo
