On 6/19/24 19:33, Jiri Pirko wrote: > [You don't often get email from jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 10:21:53AM CEST, oshpigelman@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >> This patch set implements the HabanaLabs network drivers for Gaudi2 ASIC >> which is designed for scaling of AI neural networks training. >> The patch set includes the common code which is shared by all Gaudi ASICs >> and the Gaudi2 ASIC specific code. Newer ASICs code will be followed. >> All of these network drivers are modeled as an auxiliary devices to the >> parent driver. >> >> The newly added drivers are Core Network (CN), Ethernet and InfiniBand. >> All of these drivers are based on the existing habanalabs driver which >> serves as the compute driver and the entire platform. >> The habanalabs driver probes the network drivers which configure the >> relevant NIC HW of the device. In addition, it continuously communicates >> with the CN driver for providing some services which are not NIC specific >> e.g. PCI, MMU, FW communication etc. >> >> See the drivers scheme at: >> Documentation/networking/device_drivers/ethernet/intel/hbl.rst >> >> The CN driver is both a parent and a son driver. It serves as the common >> layer of many shared operations that are required by both EN and IB >> drivers. >> >> The Gaudi2 NIC HW is composed of 48 physical lanes, 56Gbps each. Each pair >> of lanes represent a 100Gbps logical port. > > What do you mean by "logical port"? Is it a separate netdevice. So you > have 24 netdevices visible on the system? How the physical port/ports > look like? How do you model that in devlink? Do you support port > splitting? > I first described our HW. It is composed of 48 physical lanes. But each netdevice (meaning a "logical port") is mapped to a pair of these, so we end up with 24 netdevices visible on the system. Technically we could work in a mode where we have 48 netdevices visible on the system and each netdevice is mapped to a single physical lane, but we have no use case for that. We are not interagted to devlink, we didn't find a need for that in our use cases.
