| Message ID | 20221212111645.1198680-1-michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | implement devlink reload in ice | expand |
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 12:16:35 +0100 Michal Swiatkowski wrote: > This is a part of changes done in patchset [0]. Resource management is > kind of controversial part, so I split it into two patchsets. > > It is the first one, covering refactor and implement reload API call. > The refactor will unblock some of the patches needed by SIOV or > subfunction. > > Most of this patchset is about implementing driver reload mechanism. > Part of code from probe and rebuild is used to not duplicate code. > To allow this reuse probe and rebuild path are split into smaller > functions. > > Patch "ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller functions" changes > boolean variable in function call to integer and adds define > for it. Instead of having the function called with true/false now it > can be called with readable defines ICE_VSI_FLAG_INIT or > ICE_VSI_FLAG_NO_INIT. It was suggested by Jacob Keller and probably this > mechanism will be implemented across ice driver in follow up patchset. Does not apply, unfortunately, which makes it easier for me to answer to the question "should I try to squeeze this into 6.2".. Hopefully we can get some reviews, but the changes seem uncontroversial.
On 12/12/2022 10:15 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 12:16:35 +0100 Michal Swiatkowski wrote: >> This is a part of changes done in patchset [0]. Resource management is >> kind of controversial part, so I split it into two patchsets. >> >> It is the first one, covering refactor and implement reload API call. >> The refactor will unblock some of the patches needed by SIOV or >> subfunction. >> >> Most of this patchset is about implementing driver reload mechanism. >> Part of code from probe and rebuild is used to not duplicate code. >> To allow this reuse probe and rebuild path are split into smaller >> functions. >> >> Patch "ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller functions" changes >> boolean variable in function call to integer and adds define >> for it. Instead of having the function called with true/false now it >> can be called with readable defines ICE_VSI_FLAG_INIT or >> ICE_VSI_FLAG_NO_INIT. It was suggested by Jacob Keller and probably this >> mechanism will be implemented across ice driver in follow up patchset. > > Does not apply, unfortunately, which makes it easier for me to answer > to the question "should I try to squeeze this into 6.2".. > Hopefully we can get some reviews, but the changes seem uncontroversial. Yea it seems a bit late to make it into 6.2, as much as that would be nice. We can always hold and test it on iwl until net-next re-opens. Thanks, Jake
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:46:09AM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote: > > > On 12/12/2022 10:15 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 12:16:35 +0100 Michal Swiatkowski wrote: > > > This is a part of changes done in patchset [0]. Resource management is > > > kind of controversial part, so I split it into two patchsets. > > > > > > It is the first one, covering refactor and implement reload API call. > > > The refactor will unblock some of the patches needed by SIOV or > > > subfunction. > > > > > > Most of this patchset is about implementing driver reload mechanism. > > > Part of code from probe and rebuild is used to not duplicate code. > > > To allow this reuse probe and rebuild path are split into smaller > > > functions. > > > > > > Patch "ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller functions" changes > > > boolean variable in function call to integer and adds define > > > for it. Instead of having the function called with true/false now it > > > can be called with readable defines ICE_VSI_FLAG_INIT or > > > ICE_VSI_FLAG_NO_INIT. It was suggested by Jacob Keller and probably this > > > mechanism will be implemented across ice driver in follow up patchset. > > > > Does not apply, unfortunately, which makes it easier for me to answer > > to the question "should I try to squeeze this into 6.2".. > > Hopefully we can get some reviews, but the changes seem uncontroversial. > > Yea it seems a bit late to make it into 6.2, as much as that would be nice. > > We can always hold and test it on iwl until net-next re-opens. > It was targeted to Tony dev-queue to allow some tests as Jake said. Sorry, probably I should point it out in cover letter. Most of the changes are refactor of probe / remove path, so it will be good to have some tests from iwl. I (or Tony as pull request) will send it when the net-next re-opens. Thanks > Thanks, > Jake
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 07:37:26 +0100 Michal Swiatkowski wrote: > It was targeted to Tony dev-queue to allow some tests as Jake said. > Sorry, probably I should point it out in cover letter. You can tag as intel-next, iwl-next or some such, to avoid confusion.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:18:34PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 07:37:26 +0100 Michal Swiatkowski wrote: > > It was targeted to Tony dev-queue to allow some tests as Jake said. > > Sorry, probably I should point it out in cover letter. > > You can tag as intel-next, iwl-next or some such, to avoid confusion. Thanks, I will use it next time.