Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 01:17:30AM CEST, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 11:49:36 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>>
>> During devlink reload, all driver objects should be reinstantiated with
>> the exception of devlink instance and devlink resources and params.
>> Move existing devlink_resource_size_get() calls into fib_create() just
>> before fib notifier is registered. Also, make sure that extack is
>> propagated down to fib_notifier_register() call.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>
>Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicin...@netronome.com>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/fib.c b/drivers/net/netdevsim/fib.c
>> index d2aeac0f4c2c..fdc682f3a09a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/fib.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/fib.c
>> @@ -63,12 +63,10 @@ u64 nsim_fib_get_val(struct nsim_fib_data *fib_data,
>> return max ? entry->max : entry->num;
>> }
>>
>> -int nsim_fib_set_max(struct nsim_fib_data *fib_data,
>> - enum nsim_resource_id res_id, u64 val,
>> - struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
>> +static void nsim_fib_set_max(struct nsim_fib_data *fib_data,
>> + enum nsim_resource_id res_id, u64 val)
>> {
>> struct nsim_fib_entry *entry;
>> - int err = 0;
>>
>> switch (res_id) {
>> case NSIM_RESOURCE_IPV4_FIB:
>> @@ -84,20 +82,10 @@ int nsim_fib_set_max(struct nsim_fib_data *fib_data,
>> entry = &fib_data->ipv6.rules;
>> break;
>> default:
>> - return 0;
>> - }
>> -
>> - /* not allowing a new max to be less than curren occupancy
>> - * --> no means of evicting entries
>> - */
>> - if (val < entry->num) {
>> - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "New size is less than current
>> occupancy");
>> - err = -EINVAL;
>
>This change in behaviour should perhaps be mentioned in the commit
>message. The reload will no longer fail if the resources are
>insufficient.
Reload is going to fail if the resources are insufficient. I have a
selftest for that, please see the last patch.
>
>Since we want to test reload more widely than just for the FIB limits
>that does make sense to me. Is that the thinking?
>
>> - } else {
>> - entry->max = val;
>> + WARN_ON(1);
>> + return;
>> }
>> -
>> - return err;
>> + entry->max = val;
>> }
>>
>> static int nsim_fib_rule_account(struct nsim_fib_entry *entry, bool add,
