Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] Add devlink-health support for devlink ports

[Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>]

Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 01:44:39AM CEST, kuba@kernel.org wrote:
>On Fri,  3 Jul 2020 06:27:31 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> Implement support for devlink health reporters on per-port basis. First
>> part in the series prepares common functions parts for health reporter
>> implementation. Second introduces required API to devlink-health and
>> mlx5e ones demonstrate its usage and effectively implement the feature
>> for mlx5 driver.
>> The per-port reporter functionality is achieved by adding a list of
>> devlink_health_reporters to devlink_port struct in a manner similar to
>> existing device infrastructure. This is the only major difference and
>> it makes possible to fully reuse device reporters operations.
>> The effect will be seen in conjunction with iproute2 additions and
>> will affect all devlink health commands. User can distinguish between
>> device and port reporters by looking at a devlink handle. Port reporters
>> have a port index at the end of the address and such addresses can be
>> provided as a parameter in every place where devlink-health accepted it.
>> These can be obtained from devlink port show command.
>> For example:
>> $ devlink health show
>> pci/0000:00:0a.0:
>>   reporter fw
>>     state healthy error 0 recover 0 auto_dump true
>> pci/0000:00:0a.0/1:
>>   reporter tx
>>     state healthy error 0 recover 0 grace_period 500 auto_recover true auto_dump true
>> $ devlink health set pci/0000:00:0a.0/1 reporter tx grace_period 1000 \
>> auto_recover false auto_dump false
>> $ devlink health show pci/0000:00:0a.0/1 reporter tx
>> pci/0000:00:0a.0/1:
>>   reporter tx
>>     state healthy error 0 recover 0 grace_period 1000 auto_recover flase auto_dump false
>
>What's the motivation, though?
>
>This patch series achieves nothing that couldn't be previously achieved.

Well, not really. If you have 2 ports, you have 2 set's of tx/rx health
reporters. Cannot achieve that w/o per-port health reporters.


>
>Is there no concern of uAPI breakage with moving the existing health
>reporters in patch 7?

No. This is bug by design that we are fixing now. No other way around :/
This is mlx5 only.