> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 01/16] RDMA/irdma: Add driver framework > definitions > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 06:19:07PM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote: > > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 01/16] RDMA/irdma: Add driver framework > > > definitions > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:23:45AM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote: > > > > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 01/16] RDMA/irdma: Add driver > > > > > framework definitions > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:12:36AM -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > > > > > > From: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > Register irdma as a virtbus driver capable of supporting > > > > > > virtbus devices from multi-generation RDMA capable Intel HW. > > > > > > Establish the interface with all supported netdev peer drivers and > initialize HW. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/i40iw_if.c | 228 ++++++++++ > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/irdma_if.c | 449 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/main.c | 573 > +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/main.h | 599 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > 4 files changed, 1849 insertions(+) create mode 100644 > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/i40iw_if.c > > > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/irdma_if.c > > > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/main.c > > > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/main.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I didn't look in too much details, but three things caught my > > > > > attention > > > immediately: > > > > > 1. Existence of ARP cache management logic in RDMA driver. > > > > > > > > Our HW has an independent ARP table for the rdma block. > > > > driver needs to add an ARP table entry via an rdma admin queue > > > > command before QP transitions to RTS. > > > > > > > > > 2. Extensive use of dev_*() prints while we have ibdev_*() > > > > > prints > > > > The ib device object is not available till the end of the device > > > > init similarly its unavailable early on in device deinit flows. So > > > > dev_* is all we can use in those places. > > > > > > hns guys were thinking about changing this. It looks fine to just > > > move the name assignment to the device allocation, then we don't > > > have this weirdness > > > > Did you mean moving name setting from ib_register_device to ib_device_alloc? > > Will that work ok for how rvt is handling the names in > > rvt_set_ibdev_name and its register? > > I don't see why not? rvt_set_ibdev_name is always directly after rvt_alloc_device, > which is the thing that calls ib_alloc_device > > > This could migrate a lot of the dev_* to ibdev_* but there is still > > going to be a handful of dev_* usages from our HW initialization in > > irdma_prob_dev since ib device allocation is done in irdma_open. > > Don't do that? we have a split initialization design for gen2 and future products. phase1 is control path resource initialization in irdma_probe_dev and phase-2 is the rest of the resources with the ib registration at the end of irdma_open. irdma_close must de-register the ib device which will take care of ibdev free too. So it makes sense to keep allocation of the ib device in irdma_open. Is it so bad to use dev_* prints for a few of those init stuff in irdma_probe_dev when ib device is unavailable? Isnt that what all drivers are expected to do? similar to the rule of using dev_* when struct device object is available, otherwise pr_* > > > > Alternatively, you could do as netdev does and have a special name > > > string when the name is NULL > > > > Not sure I found what your referring to. > > Did you mean similar to use of netdev_name in __netdev_printk? > > Yes OK. Thanks!
