From: Andrew Lunn <email@example.com> To: Jakub Kicinski <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Tobias Waldekranz <email@example.com>, Vadym Kochan <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "David S. Miller" <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, Mickey Rachamim <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, Vladimir Oltean <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/7] net: marvell: prestera: add LAG support Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 23:30:44 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YCG7lEncISjQwEOk@lunn.ch> (raw) In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> > > I took a quick look at it, and what I found left me very puzzled. I hope > > you do not mind me asking a generic question about the policy around > > switchdev drivers. If someone published a driver using something similar > > to the following configuration flow: > > > > iproute2 daemon(SDK) > > | ^ | > > : : : user/kernel boundary > > v | | > > netlink | | > > | | | > > v | | > > driver | | > > | | | > > '--------' | > > : kernel/hardware boundary > > v > > ASIC > > > > My guess is that they would be (rightly IMO) told something along the > > lines of "we do not accept drivers that are just shims for proprietary > > SDKs". > > > > But it seems like if that same someone has enough area to spare in their > > ASIC to embed a CPU, it is perfectly fine to run that same SDK on it, > > call it "firmware", and then push a shim driver into the kernel tree. > > > > iproute2 > > | > > : user/kernel boundary > > v > > netlink > > | > > v > > driver > > | > > | > > : kernel/hardware boundary > > '-------------. > > v > > daemon(SDK) > > | > > v > > ASIC > > > > What have we, the community, gained by this? In the old world, the > > vendor usually at least had to ship me the SDK in source form. Having > > seen the inside of some of those sausage factories, they are not the > > kinds of code bases that I want at the bottom of my stack; even less so > > in binary form where I am entirely at the vendor's mercy for bugfixes. > > > > We are talking about a pure Ethernet fabric here, so there is no fig > > leaf of "regulatory requirements" to hide behind, in contrast to WiFi > > for example. > > > > Is it the opinion of the netdev community that it is OK for vendors to > > use this model? What i find interesting is the comparison between Microchip Sparx5 and Marvell Prestera. They offer similar capabilities. Both have a CPU on them. As you say Marvell is pushing their SDK into this CPU, black box. Microchip decided to open everything, no firmware, the kernel driver is directly accessing the hardware, the datasheet is available, and microchip engineers are here on the list. I really hope that Sparx5 takes off, and displaces Prestera. In terms of being able to solve issues, we the community can work with Sparx5. Prestera is too much a black box. Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-08 22:31 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-02-03 16:54 [PATCH net-next 0/7] Marvell Prestera Switchdev misc updates Vadym Kochan 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 1/7] net: marvell: prestera: bump supported firmware version to 2.5 Vadym Kochan 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 2/7] net: marvell: prestera: disable events interrupt while handling Vadym Kochan 2021-02-05 5:10 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-05 11:28 ` Vadym Kochan 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 3/7] net: marvell: prestera: add support for AC3X 98DX3265 device Vadym Kochan 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 4/7] net: marvell: prestera: move netdev topology validation to prestera_main Vadym Kochan 2021-02-05 14:09 ` Vladimir Oltean 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 5/7] net: marvell: prestera: add LAG support Vadym Kochan 2021-02-05 5:16 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-08 19:54 ` Tobias Waldekranz 2021-02-08 21:05 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-08 22:30 ` Andrew Lunn [this message] 2021-02-09 12:37 ` Tobias Waldekranz 2021-02-09 11:56 ` Tobias Waldekranz 2021-02-09 17:48 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-09 13:58 ` Andrew Lunn 2021-02-09 17:35 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-09 20:31 ` [EXT] " Mickey Rachamim 2021-02-09 21:34 ` Tobias Waldekranz 2021-02-10 10:41 ` Mickey Rachamim 2021-02-10 21:44 ` Tobias Waldekranz 2021-02-10 0:28 ` Andrew Lunn 2021-02-10 10:42 ` Mickey Rachamim 2021-02-10 19:25 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-10 20:52 ` Taras Chornyi 2021-02-05 15:24 ` Vladimir Oltean 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 6/7] net: marvell: prestera: align flood setting according to latest firmware version Vadym Kochan 2021-02-03 16:54 ` [PATCH net-next 7/7] net: marvell: prestera: fix port event handling on init Vadym Kochan 2021-02-05 5:19 ` Jakub Kicinski 2021-02-05 12:31 ` Vadym Kochan
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=YCG7lEncISjQwEOk@lunn.ch \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [PATCH net-next 5/7] net: marvell: prestera: add LAG support' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).