[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devi
From: |
Daniel P . Berrangé |
Subject: |
Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Aug 2020 09:55:27 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.14.5 (2020-06-23) |
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:24:30AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2020/8/14 下午1:16, Yan Zhao wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:24:50PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > On 2020/8/10 下午3:46, Yan Zhao wrote:
> > > > > driver is it handled by?
> > > > It looks that the devlink is for network device specific, and in
> > > > devlink.h, it says
> > > > include/uapi/linux/devlink.h - Network physical device Netlink
> > > > interface,
> > >
> > > Actually not, I think there used to have some discussion last year and the
> > > conclusion is to remove this comment.
> > >
> > > It supports IB and probably vDPA in the future.
> > >
> > hmm... sorry, I didn't find the referred discussion. only below discussion
> > regarding to why to add devlink.
> >
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg95801.html
> > >This doesn't seem to be too much related to networking? Why can't
> > something
> > >like this be in sysfs?
> >
> > It is related to networking quite bit. There has been couple of
> > iteration of this, including sysfs and configfs implementations. There
> > has been a consensus reached that this should be done by netlink. I
> > believe netlink is really the best for this purpose. Sysfs is not a good
> > idea
>
>
> See the discussion here:
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/patch/20191115223355.1277139-1-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com/
>
>
> >
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg96102.html
> > >there is already a way to change eth/ib via
> > >echo 'eth' > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/mlx4_core/0000:02:00.0/mlx4_port1
> > >
> > >sounds like this is another way to achieve the same?
> >
> > It is. However the current way is driver-specific, not correct.
> > For mlx5, we need the same, it cannot be done in this way. Do devlink is
> > the correct way to go.
> >
> > https://lwn.net/Articles/674867/
> > There a is need for some userspace API that would allow to expose things
> > that are not directly related to any device class like net_device of
> > ib_device, but rather chip-wide/switch-ASIC-wide stuff.
> >
> > Use cases:
> > 1) get/set of port type (Ethernet/InfiniBand)
> > 2) monitoring of hardware messages to and from chip
> > 3) setting up port splitters - split port into multiple ones and squash
> > again,
> > enables usage of splitter cable
> > 4) setting up shared buffers - shared among multiple ports within one
> > chip
> >
> >
> >
> > we actually can also retrieve the same information through sysfs, .e.g
> >
> > |- [path to device]
> > |--- migration
> > | |--- self
> > | | |---device_api
> > | | |---mdev_type
> > | | |---software_version
> > | | |---device_id
> > | | |---aggregator
> > | |--- compatible
> > | | |---device_api
> > | | |---mdev_type
> > | | |---software_version
> > | | |---device_id
> > | | |---aggregator
> >
>
> Yes but:
>
> - You need one file per attribute (one syscall for one attribute)
> - Attribute is coupled with kobject
>
> All of above seems unnecessary.
>
> Another point, as we discussed in another thread, it's really hard to make
> sure the above API work for all types of devices and frameworks. So having a
> vendor specific API looks much better.
>From the POV of userspace mgmt apps doing device compat checking / migration,
we certainly do NOT want to use different vendor specific APIs. We want to
have an API that can be used / controlled in a standard manner across vendors.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, (continued)
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Yan Zhao, 2020/08/10
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Jason Wang, 2020/08/13
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Yan Zhao, 2020/08/14
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Sean Mooney, 2020/08/14
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Yan Zhao, 2020/08/16
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Jason Wang, 2020/08/17
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices,
Daniel P . Berrangé <=
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Jason Wang, 2020/08/18
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Daniel P . Berrangé, 2020/08/18
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Cornelia Huck, 2020/08/18
- RE: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Parav Pandit, 2020/08/18
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Yan Zhao, 2020/08/18
- RE: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Parav Pandit, 2020/08/19
- Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Jason Wang, 2020/08/19
- Re: [ovirt-devel] Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Jason Wang, 2020/08/19
- Re: [ovirt-devel] Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Yan Zhao, 2020/08/19
- Re: [ovirt-devel] Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices, Jason Wang, 2020/08/19