On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 11:22:23AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 09:13:00AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > I think a solid consensus on the topics above would be really useful for > > gpu/accel too. We're still busy with more pressing community/ecosystem > > building needs, but gpu fw has become rather complex and it's not > > stopping. And there's random other devices attached too nowadays, so fwctl > > makes a ton of sense. > > Yeah, I'm pretty sure GPU is going to need fwctl too, the GPU's are > going to have the same issues as NIC does. I see people are already > struggling with topics like how to get debug traces out of the GPU FW. > > > But for me the more important stuff would be some clear guidelines like > > what should be in other more across-devices subsystems like edac (or other > > ras features), what should be in functional subsystems like netdev, rdma, > > gpu/accel, ... whatever else, and what should be exposed through some > > special purpose subsystems like hwmon. > > In my mind the most important part is that fwctl is not exclusive, the > FW interface and things being manipulated must be sharable or blocked > from fwctl. We should never get in a situation where a fwctl > implementation becomes a reason we cannot have a functional subsystem > interface. Hm still not clear to me how you want to achive that, but I guess best I'll jump over to the fwctl thread and ask about those details there. > > We've got plenty of experience in enforcing such a community contract with > > vendors, but the hard part is creating a clear and ideally concise > > documentation page I can just point vendors at as the ground truth. > > Well, I tried with the documentation in the fwctl patch series.. > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/6-v2-940e479ceba9+3821-fwctl_jgg@xxxxxxxxxx/ I'll head over and drop some acks and comments. -Sima -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
