Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Apr 2024 14:36:07 -0700 | From | Jakub Kicinski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V4 0/5] mlx5 ConnectX control misc driver |
| |
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 15:45:54 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 07:50:03AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 15:30:03 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > HNS driver is a good example of such device. It has nothing to do with > > > netdev and needs common and reliable way to configure FW. > > > > Sorry, I have a completely different reading of that thread. > > Thanks for bringing it up, tho. > > > > As I said multiple times I agree that configuring custom parameters > > in RDMA is a necessity. Junxian's approach of putting such code in > > the RDMA driver / subsystem is more than reasonable. Even better, > > it looks like the API is fairly narrowly defined. > > Uh, if I understand netdev rules aren't read/write sysfs created from > drivers banned?
Neither is that true as an absolute "netdev rule" nor relevant to the discussion.
> So reasonable for RDMA but unacceptable to netdev?
I don't know or care what interface guidance you provide. What I called reasonable is putting that code in RDMA driver / subsystem.
> My brain hurts.
Maybe brains are better suited for understanding what other people say rather than twisting and misinterpreting..
> FWIW, I've been trying to push RDMA away from driver created sysfs for > a while now. Aside from the API complexity, implementations have > messed up using the sysfs APIs and resulted in some significant > problems :(
Sure, agreed, but off-topic.
| |