On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:52 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 01:39:16PM +0530, Selvin Xavier wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 9:01 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 04:10:33PM +0530, Selvin Xavier wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 10:10 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 07:45:35AM -0800, Selvin Xavier wrote: > > > > > > Implements routines to set and get different settings of > > > > > > the congestion control. This will enable the users to modify > > > > > > the settings according to their network. > > > > > > > > > > Should something like this be in debugfs though? > > > > Since these are Broadcom specific parameters, i thought its better to > > > > be under debugfs. Also I took the reference of a similar > > > > implementation in mlx5. > > > > > > debugfs is disabled in a lot of deployments, it is a big part of why > > > we are doing fwctl. If you know it works for you cases, debugfs is > > > pretty open ended.. > > The main use case for this debugfs support is for evaluation customers and > > the tuning for their network. So debugfs should be okay. > > In my experience it makes no difference, if the customer is using > secure boot then they are always using secure boot expect in small lab > systems perhaps. > > Are you certain this is useful not just "should be okay" ? Yes. It is useful based on the request we have seen from our customers. > > Jason
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
