Re: [PATCH net-next 03/13] devlink: Support add and delete devlink port

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:36:26PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/18/20 11:38 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:03:24AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> > 
> >> With Connectx-4 Lx for example the netdev can have at most 63 queues
> > 
> > What netdev calls a queue is really a "can the device deliver
> > interrupts and packets to a given per-CPU queue" and covers a whole
> > spectrum of smaller limits like RSS scheme, # of available interrupts,
> > ability of the device to create queues, etc.
> > 
> > CX4Lx can create a huge number of queues, but hits one of these limits
> > that mean netdev's specific usage can't scale up. Other stuff like
> > RDMA doesn't have the same limits, and has tonnes of queues.
> > 
> > What seems to be needed is a resource controller concept like cgroup
> > has for processes. The system is really organized into a tree:
> > 
> >            physical device
> >               mlx5_core
> >         /      |      \      \                        (aux bus)
> >      netdev   rdma    vdpa   SF  etc
> >                              |                        (aux bus)
> >                            mlx5_core
> >                           /      \                    (aux bus)
> >                        netdev   vdpa
> > 
> > And it does make a lot of sense to start to talk about limits at each
> > tree level.
> > 
> > eg the top of the tree may have 128 physical interrupts. With 128 CPU
> > cores that isn't enough interrupts to support all of those things
> > concurrently.
> > 
> > So the user may want to configure:
> >  - The first level netdev only gets 64,
> >  - 3rd level mlx5_core gets 32 
> >  - Final level vdpa gets 8
> > 
> > Other stuff has to fight it out with the remaining shared interrupts.
> > 
> > In netdev land # of interrupts governs # of queues
> > 
> > For RDMA # of interrupts limits the CPU affinities for queues
> > 
> > VPDA limits the # of VMs that can use VT-d
> > 
> > The same story repeats for other less general resources, mlx5 also
> > has consumption of limited BAR space, and consumption of some limited
> > memory elements. These numbers are much bigger and may not need
> > explicit governing, but the general concept holds.
> > 
> > It would be very nice if the limit could be injected when the aux
> > device is created but before the driver is bound. I'm not sure how to
> > manage that though..
> > 
> > I assume other devices will be different, maybe some devices have a
> > limit on the number of total queues, or a limit on the number of
> > VDPA or RDMA devices.
> 
> A lot of low level resource details that need to be summarized into a
> nicer user / config perspective to specify limits / allocations.

Well, now that we have the aux bus stuff there is a nice natural place
to put things..

The aux bus owner device (mlx5_core) could have a list of available
resources

Each aux bus device (netdev/rdma/vdpa) could have a list of consumed
resources

Some API to place a limit on the consumed resources at each aux bus
device.

The tricky bit is the auto-probing/configure. By the time the user has
a chance to apply a limit the drivers are already bound and have
already done their setup. So each subsystem has to support dynamically
imposing a limit..

And I simplified things a bit above too, we actually have two kinds of
interrupt demand: sharable and dedicated. The actual need is to carve
out a bunch of dedicated interrupts and only allow subsystems that are
doing VT-d guest interrupt assignment to consume them (eg VDPA)

Jason