From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA06C433ED for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:06:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCFF613CB for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:06:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234991AbhDVHG6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 03:06:58 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:32016 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234965AbhDVHGz (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 03:06:55 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13M72oaK001418; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 03:06:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=jgx6h0ae9zoQ7N5bBYsdcAYTRtjADEfHi6BOzPEF2uo=; b=cwA4Hhmmcn1CQ0q+z6wvCZmAzgYqw4etX5V5/wdwI2nKZxrYwaZGromwngE/cioAfXu6 hwVFtLlP8xGtUKYRPxjbyG+0gtmumKODv1CiPbmOHCnDYgx4EvPFeLxa8ihitAiewnwI T260IQ3hPPi1og9ynI9EofXhGY+Y9TkPITl+hY0b8QetRCvesnNF5AJl5kW+HNQ+LW66 h/TJYcnnryEQ63PXI02uaua1/btNSKz78VvRZaw/9NcdUBYCVxwBfiHDl/bOKxnRLiB1 nwFfhjg8/dn7G0doqJOBYPTVw5aimxrRthAjT73th9uLU4R4O9PCtJ5EJNmlkEhEoLpD cw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 382yaapyjb-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 03:06:08 -0400 Received: from m0187473.ppops.net (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13M72xUf002462; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 03:06:07 -0400 Received: from ppma03dal.us.ibm.com (b.bd.3ea9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.62.189.11]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 382yaapydv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 03:06:07 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13M6vgM0011550; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:05:59 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.24]) by ppma03dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 37yqaasygn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:05:59 +0000 Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.110]) by b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 13M75wWm35324264 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:05:58 GMT Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B3A6AE068; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:05:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DEFAE05C; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:05:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.160.109.21] (unknown [9.160.109.21]) by b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:05:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net] ibmvnic: Continue with reset if set link down failed To: Lijun Pan , Sukadev Bhattiprolu Cc: Lijun Pan , Dany Madden , David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , Tom Falcon , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org References: <20210420213517.24171-1-drt@linux.ibm.com> <60C99F56-617D-455B-9ACF-8CE1EED64D92@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20210421064527.GA2648262@us.ibm.com> From: Rick Lindsley Message-ID: <376383c3-3fbd-25bf-8fb3-6cd54c218e34@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 00:05:55 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: UKj3PdAtvpU9SNzMs46BjZtxaWT2YN9v X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: tbN13I2qbP5U4AgiF5AgwX_V0eMZnNv_ X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-22_01:2021-04-21,2021-04-21 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104060000 definitions=main-2104220059 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 4/21/21 10:06 PM, Lijun Pan wrote: > No real customer runs the system under that heavy load created by > HTX stress test, which can tear down any working system. So, are you saying the bugs that HTX uncovers are not worth fixing? There's a fair number of individuals and teams out there that utilize HTX in the absence of such a workload, and not just for vnic. What workload would you suggest to better serve "real customers"? > I think such optimizations are catered for passing HTX tests. Well, yes. If the bugs are found with HTX, the fixes are verified against HTX. If they were found with a "real customer workload" they'd be verified against a "real customer workload."