RE: [PATCH net-next 1/3] devlink: Introduce PCI PF port flavour and port attribute

From: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 1/3] devlink: Introduce PCI PF port flavour and port attribute
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 02:08:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM0PR05MB4866F1AF0CF5914B372F0BCCD1FB0@AM0PR05MB4866.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190702164252.6d4fe5e3@cakuba.netronome.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 5:13 AM
> To: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Saeed
> Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] devlink: Introduce PCI PF port flavour and
> port attribute
> 
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 18:50:31 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > I didn't see any immediate need to report, at the same time didn't
> > > > find any reason to treat such port flavours differently than
> > > > existing one. It just gives a clear view of the device's eswitch.
> > > > Might find it useful during debugging while inspecting device internal
> tables..
> > >
> > > PFs and VFs ports are not tied to network ports in switchdev mode.
> > > You have only one network port under a devlink instance AFAIR, anyway.
> > >
> > I am not sure what do you mean by network port.
> 
> DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL
> 
> > Do you intent to see a physical port that connects to physical network?
> >
> > As I described in the comment of the PF and VF flavour, it is an eswitch
> port.
> > I have shown the diagram also of the eswitch in the cover letter.
> > Port_number doesn't have to a physical port. Flavour describe what
> > port type is and number says what is the eswitch port number.
> > Hope it clarifies.
> 
> I understand what you're doing.  
o.k.

> If you want to expose some device specific
> eswitch port ID please add a new attribute for that.
> The fact that that ID may match port_number for your device today is
> coincidental.  port_number, and split attributes should not be exposed for
> PCI ports.
So your concern is non mellanox hw has eswitch but there may not be a unique handle to identify a eswitch port?
Or that handle may be wider than 32-bit?
And instead of treating port_number as handle, there should be different attribute, is that the ask?