On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 05:04:23PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 21:16:47 -0400 Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 01:51:11PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > > > But if you agree the netdev doesn't need it seems like a fairly > > > straightforward way to unblock your progress. > > > > I'm trying to understand what you are suggesting here. > > > > We have many scenarios where mlx5_core spawns all kinds of different > > devices, including recovery cases where there is no networking at all > > and only fwctl. So we can't just discard the aux dev or mlx5_core > > triggered setup without breaking scenarios. > > > > However, you seem to be suggesting that netdev-only configurations (ie > > netdev loaded but no rdma loaded) should disable fwctl. Is that the > > case? All else would remain the same. It is very ugly but I could see > > a technical path to do it, and would consider it if that brings peace. > > Yes, when RDMA driver is not loaded there should be no access to fwctl. There are users mentioned in cover letter, which need FWCTL without RDMA. https://lore.kernel.org/all/0-v4-0cf4ec3b8143+4995-fwctl_jgg@xxxxxxxxxx/ I want to suggest something different. What about to move all XXX_core logic (mlx5_core, bnxt_core, e.t.c.) from netdev to some other dedicated place? There is no technical need to have PCI/FW logic inside networking stack. Thanks
