> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkow...@linux.intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 4:44 AM
> To: Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us>
> Cc: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org; net...@vger.kernel.org; Keller, Jacob E
> <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>; Kubiak, Michal <michal.kub...@intel.com>;
> Fijalkowski, Maciej <maciej.fijalkow...@intel.com>; Samudrala, Sridhar
> <sridhar.samudr...@intel.com>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
> <przemyslaw.kits...@intel.com>; Drewek, Wojciech
> <wojciech.dre...@intel.com>; pio.raczyn...@gmail.com; j...@nvidia.com;
> Polchlopek, Mateusz <mateusz.polchlo...@intel.com>; sh...@nvidia.com
> Subject: Re: [iwl-next v2 03/15] ice: add basic devlink subfunctions support
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:04:23PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > Mon, May 13, 2024 at 10:37:23AM CEST, michal.swiatkow...@linux.intel.com
> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >
> >
> > >+int ice_devlink_create_sf_port(struct ice_dynamic_port *dyn_port)
> > >+{
> > >+ struct devlink_port_attrs attrs = {};
> > >+ struct devlink_port *devlink_port;
> > >+ struct devlink *devlink;
> > >+ struct ice_vsi *vsi;
> > >+ struct device *dev;
> > >+ struct ice_pf *pf;
> > >+ int err;
> > >+
> > >+ vsi = dyn_port->vsi;
> > >+ pf = dyn_port->pf;
> > >+ dev = ice_pf_to_dev(pf);
> > >+
> > >+ devlink_port = &dyn_port->devlink_port;
> > >+
> > >+ attrs.flavour = DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PCI_SF;
> > >+ attrs.pci_sf.pf = pf->hw.bus.func;
> > >+ attrs.pci_sf.sf = dyn_port->sfnum;
> > >+
> > >+ devlink_port_attrs_set(devlink_port, &attrs);
> > >+ devlink = priv_to_devlink(pf);
> > >+
> > >+ err = devl_port_register_with_ops(devlink, devlink_port, vsi->idx,
> > >+ &ice_devlink_port_sf_ops);
> > >+ if (err) {
> > >+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to create devlink port for Subfunction %d",
> > >+ vsi->idx);
> >
> > Either use extack or avoid this error message entirely. Could you please
> > double you don't write dmesg error messages in case you have extack
> > available in the rest of this patchset?
> >
> >
>
> Sure, I can avoid, as this is called from port representor creeation
> function. I don't want to pass extack there (code is generic for VF and
> SF, and VF call doesn't have extack).
You can also pass an extack of NULL for flows which lack the extack, since all
the extack functions are NULL-safe. Of course this does mean that you would end
up with no error message logged in the VF case...
>
> We have this pattern in few place in code (using dev_err even extack can
> be passed). Is it recommended to pass extact to all functions
> which probably want to write some message in case of error (assuming the
> call context has the extack)?
>
Generally, yes. Extended ACK messages return and get logged on the command line
of the application that issued the netlink message. This is significantly more
visible than a log message from the driver.
