Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 05:03:19PM CET, ido...@idosch.org wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 01:12:14PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@nvidia.com>
>>
>> In order to be able to configure all needed stuff on a port/netdevice
>> of a line card without the line card being present, introduce line card
>> provisioning. Basically provisioning will create a placeholder for
>> instances (ports/netdevices) for a line card type.
>>
>> Allow the user to query the supported line card types over line card
>> get command. Then implement two netlink commands to allow user to
>> provision/unprovision the line card with selected line card type.
>>
>> On the driver API side, add provision/unprovision ops and supported
>> types array to be advertised. Upon provision op call, the driver should
>> take care of creating the instances for the particular line card type.
>> Introduce provision_set/clear() functions to be called by the driver
>> once the provisioning/unprovisioning is done on its side.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> include/net/devlink.h | 31 +++++++-
>> include/uapi/linux/devlink.h | 17 +++++
>> net/core/devlink.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 3 files changed, 185 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/net/devlink.h b/include/net/devlink.h
>> index 67c2547d5ef9..854abd53e9ea 100644
>> --- a/include/net/devlink.h
>> +++ b/include/net/devlink.h
>> @@ -139,10 +139,33 @@ struct devlink_port {
>> struct mutex reporters_lock; /* Protects reporter_list */
>> };
>>
>> +struct devlink_linecard_ops;
>> +
>> struct devlink_linecard {
>> struct list_head list;
>> struct devlink *devlink;
>> unsigned int index;
>> + const struct devlink_linecard_ops *ops;
>> + void *priv;
>> + enum devlink_linecard_state state;
>> + const char *provisioned_type;
>> +};
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * struct devlink_linecard_ops - Linecard operations
>> + * @supported_types: array of supported types of linecards
>> + * @supported_types_count: number of elements in the array above
>> + * @provision: callback to provision the linecard slot with certain
>> + * type of linecard
>> + * @unprovision: callback to unprovision the linecard slot
>> + */
>> +struct devlink_linecard_ops {
>> + const char **supported_types;
>> + unsigned int supported_types_count;
>> + int (*provision)(struct devlink_linecard *linecard, void *priv,
>> + u32 type_index, struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
>> + int (*unprovision)(struct devlink_linecard *linecard, void *priv,
>> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
>> };
>>
>> struct devlink_sb_pool_info {
>> @@ -1414,9 +1437,13 @@ void devlink_port_attrs_pci_pf_set(struct
>> devlink_port *devlink_port, u32 contro
>> u16 pf, bool external);
>> void devlink_port_attrs_pci_vf_set(struct devlink_port *devlink_port, u32
>> controller,
>> u16 pf, u16 vf, bool external);
>> -struct devlink_linecard *devlink_linecard_create(struct devlink *devlink,
>> - unsigned int linecard_index);
>> +struct devlink_linecard *
>> +devlink_linecard_create(struct devlink *devlink, unsigned int
>> linecard_index,
>> + const struct devlink_linecard_ops *ops, void *priv);
>> void devlink_linecard_destroy(struct devlink_linecard *linecard);
>> +void devlink_linecard_provision_set(struct devlink_linecard *linecard,
>> + u32 type_index);
>> +void devlink_linecard_provision_clear(struct devlink_linecard *linecard);
>> int devlink_sb_register(struct devlink *devlink, unsigned int sb_index,
>> u32 size, u16 ingress_pools_count,
>> u16 egress_pools_count, u16 ingress_tc_count,
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/devlink.h b/include/uapi/linux/devlink.h
>> index e5ed0522591f..4111ddcc000b 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/devlink.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/devlink.h
>> @@ -131,6 +131,9 @@ enum devlink_command {
>> DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_NEW,
>> DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_DEL,
>>
>> + DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_PROVISION,
>> + DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_UNPROVISION,
>
>I do not really see the point in these two commands. Better extend
>DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_SET to carry these attributes.
Yeah, I was thinking about that. Not sure it is correct though. This is
single purpose command. It really does not change "an attribute" as the
"_SET" commands are usually doing. Consider extension of "_SET" by other
attributes. Then it looks wrong.
>
>> +
>> /* add new commands above here */
>> __DEVLINK_CMD_MAX,
>> DEVLINK_CMD_MAX = __DEVLINK_CMD_MAX - 1
>> @@ -329,6 +332,17 @@ enum devlink_reload_limit {
>>
>> #define DEVLINK_RELOAD_LIMITS_VALID_MASK
>> (_BITUL(__DEVLINK_RELOAD_LIMIT_MAX) - 1)
>>
>> +enum devlink_linecard_state {
>> + DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNSPEC,
>> + DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONED,
>> + DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONING,
>> + DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONING,
>
>Can you explain why these two states are necessary? Any reason the
>provision operation can't be synchronous? This is somewhat explained in
>patch #8, but it should really be explained here. Changelog says:
>
>"To avoid deadlock and to mimic actual HW flow, use workqueue
>to add/del ports during provisioning as the port add/del calls
>devlink_port_register/unregister() which take devlink mutex."
>
>The deadlock is not really a reason to have these states.
It is, need to avoid recursice locking
>'DEVLINK_CMD_PORT_SPLIT' also calls devlink_port_register() /
>devlink_port_unregister() and the deadlock is solved by:
>
>'internal_flags = DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NO_LOCK'
Yeah, however, there, the port_index is passed down to the driver, not
the actual object pointer. That's why it can be done like that.
>
>A hardware flow the requires it is something else...
Hardware flow in case of Spectrum is async too.
>
>> + DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONED,
>> +
>> + __DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_MAX,
>> + DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_MAX = __DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_MAX - 1
>> +};
>> +
>> enum devlink_attr {
>> /* don't change the order or add anything between, this is ABI! */
>> DEVLINK_ATTR_UNSPEC,
>> @@ -535,6 +549,9 @@ enum devlink_attr {
>> DEVLINK_ATTR_RELOAD_ACTION_STATS, /* nested */
>>
>> DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_INDEX, /* u32 */
>> + DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_STATE, /* u8 */
>> + DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_TYPE, /* string */
>> + DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_SUPPORTED_TYPES, /* nested */
>>
>> /* add new attributes above here, update the policy in devlink.c */
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/devlink.c b/net/core/devlink.c
>> index 564e921133cf..434eecc310c3 100644
>> --- a/net/core/devlink.c
>> +++ b/net/core/devlink.c
>> @@ -1192,7 +1192,9 @@ static int devlink_nl_linecard_fill(struct sk_buff
>> *msg,
>> u32 seq, int flags,
>> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
>> {
>> + struct nlattr *attr;
>> void *hdr;
>> + int i;
>>
>> hdr = genlmsg_put(msg, portid, seq, &devlink_nl_family, flags, cmd);
>> if (!hdr)
>> @@ -1202,6 +1204,22 @@ static int devlink_nl_linecard_fill(struct sk_buff
>> *msg,
>> goto nla_put_failure;
>> if (nla_put_u32(msg, DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_INDEX, linecard->index))
>> goto nla_put_failure;
>> + if (nla_put_u8(msg, DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_STATE, linecard->state))
>> + goto nla_put_failure;
>> + if (linecard->state >= DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONED &&
>
>This assumes that every state added after provisioned should report the
>type. Better to check for the specific states
Yes, that is correct assumption.
>
>> + nla_put_string(msg, DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_TYPE,
>> + linecard->provisioned_type))
>> + goto nla_put_failure;
>> +
>> + attr = nla_nest_start(msg, DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_SUPPORTED_TYPES);
>> + if (!attr)
>> + return -EMSGSIZE;
>> + for (i = 0; i < linecard->ops->supported_types_count; i++) {
>> + if (nla_put_string(msg, DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_TYPE,
>> + linecard->ops->supported_types[i]))
>> + goto nla_put_failure;
>> + }
>> + nla_nest_end(msg, attr);
>>
>> genlmsg_end(msg, hdr);
>> return 0;
>> @@ -1300,6 +1318,68 @@ static int devlink_nl_cmd_linecard_get_dumpit(struct
>> sk_buff *msg,
>> return msg->len;
>> }
>>
>> +static int devlink_nl_cmd_linecard_provision_doit(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> + struct genl_info *info)
>> +{
>> + struct devlink_linecard *linecard = info->user_ptr[1];
>> + const char *type;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + if (linecard->state == DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONING) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Linecard is currently being
>> provisioned");
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>> + if (linecard->state == DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONING) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Linecard is currently being
>> unprovisioned");
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>> + if (linecard->state != DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONED) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Linecard already
>> provisioned");
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (!info->attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_TYPE]) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Provision type not provided");
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + type = nla_data(info->attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_TYPE]);
>> + for (i = 0; i < linecard->ops->supported_types_count; i++) {
>> + if (!strcmp(linecard->ops->supported_types[i], type)) {
>> + linecard->state = DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONING;
>> + devlink_linecard_notify(linecard,
>> DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_NEW);
>> + return linecard->ops->provision(linecard,
>> + linecard->priv, i,
>> + info->extack);
>
>So if this fails user space will see 'provisioning' although nothing is
>being provisioned... Better to set the state and notify if this call did
>not fail
The driver is responsible to either call provision_set/provision_clear
helper. Note the async nature of this op.
>
>> + }
>> + }
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Unsupported provision type provided");
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int devlink_nl_cmd_linecard_unprovision_doit(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> + struct genl_info *info)
>> +{
>> + struct devlink_linecard *linecard = info->user_ptr[1];
>> +
>> + if (linecard->state == DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONING) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Linecard is currently being
>> provisioned");
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>> + if (linecard->state == DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONING) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Linecard is currently being
>> unprovisioned");
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>> + if (linecard->state == DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONED) {
>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(info->extack, "Linecard is not provisioned");
>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + }
>> + linecard->state = DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONING;
>> + devlink_linecard_notify(linecard, DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_NEW);
>> + return linecard->ops->unprovision(linecard, linecard->priv,
>> + info->extack);
>> +}
>> +
>> static int devlink_nl_sb_fill(struct sk_buff *msg, struct devlink *devlink,
>> struct devlink_sb *devlink_sb,
>> enum devlink_command cmd, u32 portid,
>> @@ -7759,6 +7839,7 @@ static const struct nla_policy
>> devlink_nl_policy[DEVLINK_ATTR_MAX + 1] = {
>>
>> DEVLINK_RELOAD_ACTION_MAX),
>> [DEVLINK_ATTR_RELOAD_LIMITS] =
>> NLA_POLICY_BITFIELD32(DEVLINK_RELOAD_LIMITS_VALID_MASK),
>> [DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_INDEX] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
>> + [DEVLINK_ATTR_LINECARD_TYPE] = { .type = NLA_NUL_STRING },
>> };
>>
>> static const struct genl_small_ops devlink_nl_ops[] = {
>> @@ -7806,6 +7887,20 @@ static const struct genl_small_ops devlink_nl_ops[] =
>> {
>> .internal_flags = DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NEED_LINECARD,
>> /* can be retrieved by unprivileged users */
>> },
>> + {
>> + .cmd = DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_PROVISION,
>> + .validate = GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_STRICT | GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_DUMP,
>> + .doit = devlink_nl_cmd_linecard_provision_doit,
>> + .flags = GENL_ADMIN_PERM,
>> + .internal_flags = DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NEED_LINECARD,
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .cmd = DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_UNPROVISION,
>> + .validate = GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_STRICT | GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_DUMP,
>> + .doit = devlink_nl_cmd_linecard_unprovision_doit,
>> + .flags = GENL_ADMIN_PERM,
>> + .internal_flags = DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NEED_LINECARD,
>> + },
>> {
>> .cmd = DEVLINK_CMD_SB_GET,
>> .validate = GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_STRICT | GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_DUMP,
>> @@ -8613,11 +8708,17 @@ static int __devlink_port_phys_port_name_get(struct
>> devlink_port *devlink_port,
>> * Create devlink linecard instance with provided linecard index.
>> * Caller can use any indexing, even hw-related one.
>> */
>> -struct devlink_linecard *devlink_linecard_create(struct devlink *devlink,
>> - unsigned int linecard_index)
>> +struct devlink_linecard *
>> +devlink_linecard_create(struct devlink *devlink, unsigned int
>> linecard_index,
>> + const struct devlink_linecard_ops *ops, void *priv)
>> {
>> struct devlink_linecard *linecard;
>>
>> + if (WARN_ON(!ops || !ops->supported_types ||
>> + !ops->supported_types_count ||
>> + !ops->provision || !ops->unprovision))
>> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>> +
>> mutex_lock(&devlink->lock);
>> if (devlink_linecard_index_exists(devlink, linecard_index)) {
>> mutex_unlock(&devlink->lock);
>> @@ -8630,6 +8731,9 @@ struct devlink_linecard
>> *devlink_linecard_create(struct devlink *devlink,
>>
>> linecard->devlink = devlink;
>> linecard->index = linecard_index;
>> + linecard->ops = ops;
>> + linecard->priv = priv;
>> + linecard->state = DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONED;
>> list_add_tail(&linecard->list, &devlink->linecard_list);
>> mutex_unlock(&devlink->lock);
>> devlink_linecard_notify(linecard, DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_NEW);
>> @@ -8653,6 +8757,39 @@ void devlink_linecard_destroy(struct devlink_linecard
>> *linecard)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_linecard_create);
>>
>> +/**
>> + * devlink_linecard_provision_set - Set provisioning on linecard
>
>'Set linecard as provisioned' maybe?
Sure, why not.
>
>> + *
>> + * @devlink_linecard: devlink linecard
>> + * @type_index: index of the linecard type (in array of types in ops)
>> + */
>> +void devlink_linecard_provision_set(struct devlink_linecard *linecard,
>> + u32 type_index)
>> +{
>> + WARN_ON(type_index >= linecard->ops->supported_types_count);
>
>Wouldn't this explode below when you use the index to access the array?
>Maybe better to just warn and return
Okay.
>
>> + mutex_lock(&linecard->devlink->lock);
>> + linecard->state = DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_PROVISIONED;
>> + linecard->provisioned_type = linecard->ops->supported_types[type_index];
>> + mutex_unlock(&linecard->devlink->lock);
>> + devlink_linecard_notify(linecard, DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_NEW);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_linecard_provision_set);
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * devlink_linecard_provision_clear - Clear provisioning on linecard
>
>'Set linecard as unprovisioned' maybe?
Sure, why not.
>
>> + *
>> + * @devlink_linecard: devlink linecard
>> + */
>> +void devlink_linecard_provision_clear(struct devlink_linecard *linecard)
>> +{
>> + mutex_lock(&linecard->devlink->lock);
>> + linecard->state = DEVLINK_LINECARD_STATE_UNPROVISIONED;
>> + linecard->provisioned_type = NULL;
>> + mutex_unlock(&linecard->devlink->lock);
>> + devlink_linecard_notify(linecard, DEVLINK_CMD_LINECARD_NEW);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_linecard_provision_clear);
>> +
>> int devlink_sb_register(struct devlink *devlink, unsigned int sb_index,
>> u32 size, u16 ingress_pools_count,
>> u16 egress_pools_count, u16 ingress_tc_count,
>> --
>> 2.26.2
>>
